Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD
| От | Michael March |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTi=km+H+mZ=yyx0_HTFZ-yU2sh85D+p5cs+ZcUSF@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD (Scott Carey <scott@richrelevance.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD
vs desktop HDD
Re: Completely un-tuned Postgresql benchmark results: SSD vs desktop HDD |
| Список | pgsql-performance |
SSD's actually vary quite a bit with typical postgres benchmark workloads.
You mean various SSDs from different vendors? Or are you saying the same SSD model might vary in performance from drive to drive?
Many of them also do not guarantee data that has been sync'd will not be lost if power fails (most hard drives with a sane OS and file system do).
What feature does an SSD need to have to insure that sync'd data is indeed written to the SSD in the case of power loss?
On Aug 7, 2010, at 4:47 PM, Michael March wrote:If anyone is interested I just completed a series of benchmarks of stock Postgresql running on a normal HDD vs a SSD.If you don't want to read the post, the summary is that SSDs are 5 to 7 times faster than a 7200RPM HDD drive under a pgbench load.Is this what everyone else is seeing?Thanks!
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: