Re: Solid State Drives
- From: Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Freeman, Donald" <dofreeman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 10:05:24 -0500
Yes, that is the way I understand it. If you do purchase those, we would
really be interested in your results.
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Freeman, Donald <dofreeman@xxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> OK, I think I understand now. Each of these new drives is equivalent to
> a spindle and you mirror and stripe exactly the same way.
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Matthew Zito [mailto:mzito@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Friday, May 01, 2009 10:56 AM
> *To:* Freeman, Donald; Andrew Kerber
> *Cc:* oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> *Subject:* RE: Solid State Drives
>
> No, you’d still buy 2 x drives for mirroring, and 3+ x for RAID5.
> Remember that the physical interface from the drive to the array is still a
> SPOF, so you can’t depend on the internal isolation within a drive.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Freeman, Donald
> *Sent:* Friday, May 01, 2009 10:51 AM
> *To:* 'Andrew Kerber'
> *Cc:* Oracle-L (oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
> *Subject:* RE: Solid State Drives
>
>
>
> So, if I bought one of these 4TB monsters I'd just split it into 2X2 TB
> mirrors? Does it have to be striped or that doesn't make sense any more?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Andrew Kerber [mailto:andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Friday, May 01, 2009 10:42 AM
> *To:* Freeman, Donald
> *Subject:* Re: Solid State Drives
>
> Mirroring, etc is still required. Like most modern storage, the arrays
> themselves normally handle this though.
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Freeman, Donald <dofreeman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> But what about mirroring? Are these devices so reliable that we won't
> have to make redundant copies of the data to prevent loss? What's the
> architecture look like?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Andrew Kerber [mailto:andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Friday, May 01, 2009 10:18 AM
> *To:* Freeman, Donald
> *Cc:* Oracle-L (oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
> *Subject:* Re: Solid State Drives
>
> I wrote an article in IOUG Select journal about Solid State. I really
> think Solid Statie is the coming thing. At this point, it is too expensive
> to put all your storage on SS, but if you put your popular tables on it, you
> can see substantial speed improvements.
>
> If they can resolve the write issue, I could see SS really helping to
> reduce pinging in RAC by making the IO to disk almost as fast as the IO to
> cache, thus reducing the required cache sizes and the pinging caused by
> that. Redo log would also be a good usage for SS, reducing the time to
> switch logs.
>
> Currently, the developers are centered on leveling the writing, that is
> making the level of writes the same across all portions of the SSD. That is
> showing promise in extending the life of the SS storage. Solaris is
> working on a major initiative in SSD, I dont know how that will be affected
> by their purchase by Oracle
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Freeman, Donald <dofreeman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Has anybody given any thought to where we are going as SSD's get cheaper
> and bigger? We've been going round and round at my shop with discussions
> about RAID, other disk allocation issues, fights over storage. I mean we
> seem to spend a lot of time on that issue. I saw that IBM is testing a 4 TB
> SSD. I was wondering if you'd have to mirror that, What kind of
> reliability we would be getting. No more RAID discussions? I've heard
> there is a finite number of times you can write to it. What's the upgrade
> path here?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew W. Kerber
>
> 'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
>
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew W. Kerber
>
> 'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
>
--
Andrew W. Kerber
'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
Other related posts:
