Re: Opinions on SSDs
| От | Craig James |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Opinions on SSDs |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFwQ8rd7cg1QpuQnSdtcL0mJYuC9eDJ26wUzjWa4_NFJxD+R=A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Opinions on SSDs ("David F. Skoll" <dfs@roaringpenguin.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Opinions on SSDs
|
| Список | pgsql-admin |
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:28 AM, David F. Skoll <dfs@roaringpenguin.com> wrote:
3) Our current workload peaks at about 5000 transactions per second;
you can assume about one-third to one-half of those are writes. Do
you think we can get away with 16 10Krpm SATA drives instead of the
SSDs?
pgbench peaks out at 5K-7K transactions per second on my server which uses just 10ea. of 7Krpm SATA drives:
WAL: RAID1 (2 disks)
Data: RAID10 (8 disks)
3Ware RAID controller with BBU
2x4 core Intel CPUs
12 GB memory
I don't know how pgbench compares to your workload. But suspect 16 10K SATA drives would be pretty fast if you combine them with a BBU RAID controller.
On the other hand, I swore this would be the last server I buy with spinning storage.
Craig
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: