Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-29 Thread Darren J Moffat
Adam Leventhal wrote:
 For a root device it doesn't matter that much. You're not going to be  
 writing to the device at a high data rate so write/erase cycles don't  
 factor much (MLC can sustain about a factor of 10 more). With MLC  
 you'll get 2-4x the capacity for the same price, but again that  
 doesn't matter much for a root device. Performance is typically a bit  
 better with SLC -- especially on the write side -- but it's not such a  
 huge difference.
 
 The reason you'd use a flash SSD for a boot device is power (with  
 maybe a dash of performance), and either SLC or MLC will do just fine.

Or available physical space in the case.  For example a home server or 
small consumer NAS appliance where you want to maximize the space 
available for the user data ZFS pool and keep the OS in a completely 
separate pool but don't have the space for even a 2.5 drive.

This is exactly the situation have have and I'm planning on migrating 
the OS to a consumer SSD (A San Disk Extreme III) via an IDE/CF adaptor, 
thus keeping OS and data pools separate.

-- 
Darren J Moffat
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-26 Thread Adam Leventhal
For a root device it doesn't matter that much. You're not going to be  
writing to the device at a high data rate so write/erase cycles don't  
factor much (MLC can sustain about a factor of 10 more). With MLC  
you'll get 2-4x the capacity for the same price, but again that  
doesn't matter much for a root device. Performance is typically a bit  
better with SLC -- especially on the write side -- but it's not such a  
huge difference.

The reason you'd use a flash SSD for a boot device is power (with  
maybe a dash of performance), and either SLC or MLC will do just fine.

Adam

On Sep 24, 2008, at 11:41 AM, Erik Trimble wrote:

 I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD,  
 but I
 want to prevent myself from having a think-o.


 I'm looking to get (2) SSD to use as my boot drive. It looks like I  
 can
 get 32GB SSDs composed of either SLC or MLC for roughly equal pricing.
 Which would be the better technology?  (I'll worry about rated access
 times/etc of the drives, I'm just wondering about general tech for  
 an OS
 boot drive usage...)



 -- 
 Erik Trimble
 Java System Support
 Mailstop:  usca22-123
 Phone:  x17195
 Santa Clara, CA
 Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800)

 ___
 zfs-discuss mailing list
 zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
 http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


--
Adam Leventhal, Fishworkshttp://blogs.sun.com/ahl

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


[zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-24 Thread Erik Trimble
I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD, but I
want to prevent myself from having a think-o.


I'm looking to get (2) SSD to use as my boot drive. It looks like I can
get 32GB SSDs composed of either SLC or MLC for roughly equal pricing.
Which would be the better technology?  (I'll worry about rated access
times/etc of the drives, I'm just wondering about general tech for an OS
boot drive usage...)



-- 
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop:  usca22-123
Phone:  x17195
Santa Clara, CA
Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800)

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-24 Thread Neal Pollack
Erik Trimble wrote:
 I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD, but I
 want to prevent myself from having a think-o.


 I'm looking to get (2) SSD to use as my boot drive. It looks like I can
 get 32GB SSDs composed of either SLC or MLC for roughly equal pricing.
 Which would be the better technology?  (I'll worry about rated access
 times/etc of the drives, I'm just wondering about general tech for an OS
 boot drive usage...)



   

SLC is faster and typically more expensive.


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-24 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Erik Trimble wrote:

 I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD, but I
 want to prevent myself from having a think-o.

SLC = Single level
MLC = Multi level

Since the SLC stores only a binary value rather than several possible 
encoded values it becomes more reliable but stores less data per cell.

Bob
==
Bob Friesenhahn
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-24 Thread Rich Teer
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Erik Trimble wrote:

 I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD, but I
 want to prevent myself from having a think-o.

Depends on what one prefers, I guess.  :-)

SLC is prefered for performance reasons, MLC tends to be cheaper.
I installed an SLC SSD in my Ferrari 3400.  It was SIGNIFICANTLY
faster than the 7200RPM spinning rust it replaced (which was no
slouch itself).

 times/etc of the drives, I'm just wondering about general tech for an OS
 boot drive usage...)

FWIW, I'd say go with SLC.

-- 
Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA

CEO,
My Online Home Inventory

URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
  http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer
  http://www.myonlinehomeinventory.com
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-24 Thread Tim
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Erik Trimble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD, but I
 want to prevent myself from having a think-o.


 I'm looking to get (2) SSD to use as my boot drive. It looks like I can
 get 32GB SSDs composed of either SLC or MLC for roughly equal pricing.
 Which would be the better technology?  (I'll worry about rated access
 times/etc of the drives, I'm just wondering about general tech for an OS
 boot drive usage...)


Depends on the MFG.  The new Intel MLC's have proven to be as fast if not
faster than the SLC's, but they also cost just as much.  If they brought the
price down, I'd say MLC all the way.  All other things being equal though,
SLC.


--Tim
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-24 Thread Mike Gerdts
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Erik Trimble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD, but I
 want to prevent myself from having a think-o.

MLC - description as to why can be found in

http://mags.acm.org/communications/200807/

See Flash Storage Memory by Adam Leventhal, page 47.

-- 
Mike Gerdts
http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-24 Thread Neal Pollack

Tim wrote:



On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Erik Trimble [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD,
but I
want to prevent myself from having a think-o.


I'm looking to get (2) SSD to use as my boot drive. It looks like
I can
get 32GB SSDs composed of either SLC or MLC for roughly equal pricing.
Which would be the better technology?  (I'll worry about rated access
times/etc of the drives, I'm just wondering about general tech for
an OS
boot drive usage...)


Depends on the MFG.  The new Intel MLC's have proven to be as fast if 
not faster than the SLC's,


That is not comparing apples to apples.   The new Intel MLCs take the 
slower, lower cost MLC chips,
and put them in parallel channels connected to an internal controller 
chip (think of RAID striping).

That way, they get large aggregate speeds for less total cost.
Other vendors will start to follow this idea.

But if you just take a raw chip in one channel, SLC is faster.

And, in the end, yes, the new intel SSDs are very nice.

but they also cost just as much.  If they brought the price down, I'd 
say MLC all the way.  All other things being equal though, SLC.



--Tim


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
  


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] Which is better for root ZFS: mlc or slc SSD?

2008-09-24 Thread Scott Laird
In general, I think SLC is better, but there are a number of brand-new
MLC devices on the market that are really fast; until a new generation
of SLC devices show up, the MLC drives kind of win by default.

Intel's supposed to have a SLC drive showing up early next year that
has similar read performance to their new MLC device, but with 2x the
write speed, but that's at least 3 months out.


Scott

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Neal Pollack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Tim wrote:

 On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Erik Trimble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I was under the impression that MLC is the preferred type of SSD, but I
 want to prevent myself from having a think-o.


 I'm looking to get (2) SSD to use as my boot drive. It looks like I can
 get 32GB SSDs composed of either SLC or MLC for roughly equal pricing.
 Which would be the better technology?  (I'll worry about rated access
 times/etc of the drives, I'm just wondering about general tech for an OS
 boot drive usage...)


 Depends on the MFG.  The new Intel MLC's have proven to be as fast if not
 faster than the SLC's,

 That is not comparing apples to apples.   The new Intel MLCs take the
 slower, lower cost MLC chips,
 and put them in parallel channels connected to an internal controller chip
 (think of RAID striping).
 That way, they get large aggregate speeds for less total cost.
 Other vendors will start to follow this idea.

 But if you just take a raw chip in one channel, SLC is faster.

 And, in the end, yes, the new intel SSDs are very nice.

 but they also cost just as much.  If they brought the price down, I'd say
 MLC all the way.  All other things being equal though, SLC.


 --Tim

 
 ___
 zfs-discuss mailing list
 zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
 http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


 ___
 zfs-discuss mailing list
 zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
 http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss