Re: Planning a new server - help needed
От | James Mansion |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Planning a new server - help needed |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 47EE72B9.1000507@mansionfamily.plus.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Planning a new server - help needed (PFC <lists@peufeu.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
PFC wrote: > >> Why do you claim that 'More platters also means slower seeks >> and generally slower performance.'? > > More platters -> more heads -> heavier head assembly -> slower > seek time Note sure I've sen a lot of evidence of that in drive specifications! > Gigabyte should revamp their i-RAM to use ECC RAM of a larger > capacity... and longer lasting battery backup... You would think a decent capacitor or rechargable button battery would be enough to dump it to a flash memory. No problem with flash wear then. > I wonder, how many write cycles those Flash drives can take before > reliability becomes a problem... Hard to get data isn't it? I believe its hundreds of thousands to millions now. Now each record in most OLTP tables is rewritten a few times unless its stuff that can go into temp tables etc, which should be elsewhere. Index pages clearly get rewritten often. I suspect a mix of storage technologies will be handy for some time yet - WAL on disk, and temp tables on disk with no synchronous fsync requirement. I think life is about to get interesting in DBMS storage. All good for us users. James
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: