Re: BBU still needed with SSD?
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BBU still needed with SSD? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4E2594D7.7000001@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BBU still needed with SSD? (Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BBU still needed with SSD?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Yeb Havinga wrote: > So for the Intels it's probably also lifetime writes in GB but you'd > have to check with an Intel smart values reader to be absolutely sure. With my 320 series drive, the LBA units are pretty clearly 32MB each. Watch this: root@toy:/ssd/data# smartctl --version smartctl 5.40 2010-07-12 r3124 [x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu] (local build) ... root@toy:/ssd/data# du -skh pg_xlog/ 4.2G pg_xlog/ root@toy:/ssd/data# smartctl -a /dev/sdg1 | grep LBAs 241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 18128 242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 10375 root@toy:/ssd/data# cat pg_xlog/* > /dev/null root@toy:/ssd/data# smartctl -a /dev/sdg1 | grep LBAs 241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 18128 242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 10508 That's an increase of 133 after reading 4.2GB of data, which means makes each LBA turn out to be 32MB in size. Let's try to confirm that by doing a write: root@toy:/ssd/gsmith# smartctl -a /dev/sdg1 | grep LBAs 241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 18159 242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 10508 root@toy:/ssd/gsmith# dd if=/dev/zero of=test_file.0 bs=32M count=25 && sync 25+0 records in 25+0 records out 838860800 bytes (839 MB) copied, 5.95257 s, 141 MB/s root@toy:/ssd/gsmith# smartctl -a /dev/sdg1 | grep LBAs 241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 18184 242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 10508 18184 - 18159 = 25; exactly the count I used in 32MB blocks. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: