Hi
Was just wondering if anyone has yet had a chance to play around with a servoy server with the new SSD drives. Particularly the Intel x-25 80GB drives.
These are reporting some pretty amazing performance numbers with their miniscule seek times. They seem especially suited to database app servers.
Hi Rodney,
no one seems to have replied to this & I’d be VERY interested in the results as I have a client who is thinking of getting SSDs to speed up Servoy/Sybase.
Rafi
Servoy shouldn’t gain much performance from the SSD but the DB server should.
It all depends on how much the HD is used by the database anyway, I wouldn’t expect a very big difference unless you have very large tables and your solution relies more on SELECT than on INSERT or UPDATE. I guess that the only way is to try it.
ngervasi:
Servoy shouldn’t gain much performance from the SSD but the DB server should.
It all depends on how much the HD is used by the database anyway, I wouldn’t expect a very big difference unless you have very large tables and your solution relies more on SELECT than on INSERT or UPDATE. I guess that the only way is to try it.
Hi Nicola,
I am definitely thinking of the DB Server & looking at the perf. log, because of the way Servoy uses relations, it relies VERY heavily on SELECT statements .
Anyone know of a European Server maker who specs. out their servers with SSD RAID Arrays?
Rafi
Not me, sorry.
I’d go for fast hard disks anyway, SSD is just too young, I wouldn’t risk using it in a server for DB storage for the time being.
Let’s have a funny pause. I found this video VERY interesting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96dWOEa4Djs&eurl=http://www.macbidouille.com/news/2009-03-11/&feature=player_embedded
In a couple of years, I think Solid State Drive will be the norm. I know they want to make profit, but hopefully, the manufacturers won’t go too low on the quality of their material. The MTBF (Mean Time Before Failure) for “memory hard drives” has to be at least as good as mechanical hard drives. Real-time speed is not the only thing that matters.
Yep those 24 x SSD drives is the recommended config for your database server. If budgets are tight you can also consider writing your app better
Jan Aleman:
Yep those 24 x SSD drives is the recommended config for your database server. If budgets are tight you can also consider writing your app better
Or when you only do selects on a table then use a ramdrive and map a tablespace to it and copy the used table to it.
RAM is still cheaper (and faster!) than SSD’s. SSD’s however can recover from a power outage, RAM doesn’t.
FYI
This is an interesting article about storing your indexes (not the data) on SSD’s with PostgreSQL but I am sure this applies to other RDBMS’s too.
You should be able to do the same using RAM drives. You just need to reindex your table(s) each time you reboot (with a RAM drive) or when your SSD’s wear out.
And like I said earlier, RAM is way faster and cheaper than SSD’s (speed/price wise) but eventually you might need to go to SSD’s because of the size of your indexes.
dont know if i agree with ram being as cheap as ssd.
I think 30 Euro will give you now 1GB ram…
But for 30 euro you can get 16GB of SSD (or something like that) so that is quite huge.
Also creating indexes can be very time consuming on large databases. Besides that i expect if i have 16GB in my machine and if i make 8GB a ram where i create the indexes on that that wont give me more performance
then if i would give that 8GB to the database process itself.
Because i would expect that any decent database would do the caching of the needed indexes anyway as much as possible in memory for me.