On 10/01/2011 07:39 PM, David Boreham wrote:
I've already tried bonnie++, sysbench and a simple WAL emulation test program I wrote more than 10 years ago. The drive tests at around 160Mbyte/s on bulk data and 4k tps for commit rate writing small blocks.
That sounds about the same performance as the 320 drive I tested earlier this year then. You might try duplicating some of the benchmarks I ran on that: http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4d9d1fc3.4020...@2ndquadrant.com
Make sure to reference the capacity of the drive though. The 320 units do scale their performance based on that, presumably there's some of that with the 710s as well.
I just released a new benchmarking wrapper to measure seek performance of drives and graph the result, and that's giving me interesting results when comparing the 320 vs. traditional disk arrays. I've attached a teaser output from it on a few different drive setups I've tested recently. (The 320 test there was seeking against a smaller data set than the regular arrays, but its performance doesn't degrade much based on that anyway)
The program is at https://github.com/gregs1104/seek-scaling but it's still quite rough to use.
-- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US g...@2ndquadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
<<attachment: array-vs-ssd.png>>
-- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
