> "CB" == Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
CB> Unfortunately, while there are companies hawking SSDs, they are in the
CB> "you'll have to talk to our salescritter for pricing" category, which
CB> means that they must be ferociously expensive. :-(.
You ain't kidding. Unfortunat
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
Yes. If and only if you have a battery-backed cache. I know of no
IDE drives that have that, but there's nothing about the spec which
makes it impossible.
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0103.0/1084.html
Relevant section:
Maybe that is why there is a vender
> > Unfortunately, while there are companies hawking SSDs, they are in the
> > "you'll have to talk to our salescritter for pricing" category, which
> > means that they must be ferociously expensive. :-(.
>
> the cheapest I found was the one with external backup power was ~1.8k$
> for 2GB PCI de
Christopher Browne kirjutas K, 01.10.2003 kell 19:21:
>
> The FS-related result appeared surprising, as the "stories" I had
> heard suggested that JFS hadn't been particularly heavily tuned on
> Linux, whereas XFS was supposed to be the "speed demon."
Gentoo linux recommends XFS only for SAN+fib
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Sullivan) writes:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 07:14:32AM -0600, scott.marlowe wrote:
>> FYI, on a Dual PIV2800 with 2 gig ram and a single UDMA 80 gig hard drive,
>> I from 420 tps to 22 tps when I disable write caching. WOW. A factor of
>> about 20 times slower. (pgben
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 07:14:32AM -0600, scott.marlowe wrote:
> FYI, on a Dual PIV2800 with 2 gig ram and a single UDMA 80 gig hard drive,
> I from 420 tps to 22 tps when I disable write caching. WOW. A factor of
> about 20 times slower. (pgbench -c 4 -t 100)
That's completely consistent wit
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 04:46:00PM -0400, Michael Adler wrote:
> > So the quesiton is whether it is ever sensible to use write-caching and
> > expect comparable persistence.
>
> Yes. If and only if you have a battery-backed cache. I know of no
> IDE
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 04:46:00PM -0400, Michael Adler wrote:
> So the quesiton is whether it is ever sensible to use write-caching and
> expect comparable persistence.
Yes. If and only if you have a battery-backed cache. I know of no
IDE drives that have that, but there's nothing about the spe
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have been experimenting with a new Seagate Cheetah 10k-RPM SCSI to
> > compare with a cheaper Seagate Barracuda 7200-RPM IDE (each in a
> > single-drive configuration). The Cheetah definately dominates the gene
Michael Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have been experimenting with a new Seagate Cheetah 10k-RPM SCSI to
> compare with a cheaper Seagate Barracuda 7200-RPM IDE (each in a
> single-drive configuration). The Cheetah definately dominates the generic
> IO tests such as bonnie++, but fares poor
I have been experimenting with a new Seagate Cheetah 10k-RPM SCSI to
compare with a cheaper Seagate Barracuda 7200-RPM IDE (each in a
single-drive configuration). The Cheetah definately dominates the generic
IO tests such as bonnie++, but fares poorly with pgbench (and other
postgresql operations)
11 matches
Mail list logo
