RE: Solid State Disks for Databases
- From: "Kennedy, Jim" <jim_kennedy@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>, <DGoulet@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:27:24 -0700
Or http://www.apple.com/xserve/raid/
At Open World I attended a fasinating presentation on running 10G on an
Apple Cluster. (I call it an Orchard, since it is a server farm.... I
can hear the groans from here.) Very reliable, very fast, and
inexpensive.(and unix underneath) It seems that Apple has engineered
this thing to do high volume IO for video editing. Hmm, that actually
might be effective for datawarehousing. Might be something to look
into. (no I don't sell Apple equipment.)
Jim
________________________________
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Niall Litchfield
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 11:53 AM
To: DGoulet@xxxxxxxx
Cc: hkchital@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Oracle-L
Subject: Re: Solid State Disks for Databases
On 9/27/05, Goulet, Dick <DGoulet@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hemant,
Yes they appear to be much faster than normal disks, but
they
are also substantially, like a factor of 3 or 4 times, more
expensive as
well. We use EMC Symetrix systems and right now we can get 72GB
mirrored
for about $5,000. Soliddata's E75 is roughly the same price and
only
has 2GB of space.
See Cary's excellent, as usual, post on not spending money where it
makes almost no difference.
Where I suspect a number of systems may benefit is in alleviating the
redo bottleneck. (This is of course detectable by looking in the right
place). redo is often a bottleneck on heavy transactional systems
(especially those that have more transactions than they should, and ssd
for redo and maybe archives *might* help.
ps. $5000 for 72gb seems to come from a vendor that sells Redundant
Arrays of Inordinately expensive Disks. Is the performance and
reliability really better than say http://www.apple.com/xserve/raid/ ?
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.niall.litchfield.dial.pipex.com
Other related posts:
