Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Ben Chobot
On Mar 17, 2010, at 7:41 AM, Brad Nicholson wrote: > As an aside, some folks in our Systems Engineering department here did > do some testing of FusionIO, and they found that the helper daemons were > inefficient and placed a fair amount of load on the server. That might > be something to watch o

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread david
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Brad Nicholson wrote: On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 14:11 -0400, Justin Pitts wrote: On Mar 17, 2010, at 10:41 AM, Brad Nicholson wrote: On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 09:52 -0400, Justin Pitts wrote: FusionIO is publicly claiming 24 years @ 5TB/day on the 80GB SLC device, which wear le

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Brad Nicholson
On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 14:11 -0400, Justin Pitts wrote: > On Mar 17, 2010, at 10:41 AM, Brad Nicholson wrote: > > > On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 09:52 -0400, Justin Pitts wrote: > >> FusionIO is publicly claiming 24 years @ 5TB/day on the 80GB SLC device, > >> which wear levels across 100GB of actual ins

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Kenny Gorman
Greg, Did you ever contact them and get your hands on one? We eventually did see long SSD rebuild times on server crash as well. But data came back uncorrupted per my blog post. This is a good case for Slony Slaves. Anyone in a high TX low downtime environment would have already engineered

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Justin Pitts
FusionIO is publicly claiming 24 years @ 5TB/day on the 80GB SLC device, which wear levels across 100GB of actual installed capacity. http://community.fusionio.com/forums/p/34/258.aspx#258 Max drive performance would be about 41TB/day, which coincidently works out very close to the 3 year warr

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Justin Pitts
On Mar 17, 2010, at 9:03 AM, Brad Nicholson wrote: > I've been hearing bad things from some folks about the quality of the > FusionIO drives from a durability standpoint. Can you be more specific about that? Durability over what time frame? How many devices in the sample set? How did FusionIO de

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Justin Pitts
On Mar 17, 2010, at 10:41 AM, Brad Nicholson wrote: > On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 09:52 -0400, Justin Pitts wrote: >> FusionIO is publicly claiming 24 years @ 5TB/day on the 80GB SLC device, >> which wear levels across 100GB of actual installed capacity. >> http://community.fusionio.com/forums/p/34/2

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Brad Nicholson
On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 09:52 -0400, Justin Pitts wrote: > FusionIO is publicly claiming 24 years @ 5TB/day on the 80GB SLC device, > which wear levels across 100GB of actual installed capacity. > http://community.fusionio.com/forums/p/34/258.aspx#258 > 20% of overall capacity free for levelling

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Brad Nicholson
On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 09:11 -0400, Justin Pitts wrote: > On Mar 17, 2010, at 9:03 AM, Brad Nicholson wrote: > > > I've been hearing bad things from some folks about the quality of the > > FusionIO drives from a durability standpoint. > > Can you be more specific about that? Durability over what t

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Brad Nicholson
On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 14:30 +0200, Devrim GÜNDÜZ wrote: > On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 09:38 -0800, Ben Chobot wrote: > > We've enjoyed our FusionIO drives very much. They can do 100k iops > > without breaking a sweat. > > Yeah, performance is excellent. I bet we could get more, but CPU was > bottleneck

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-17 Thread Devrim GÜNDÜZ
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 09:38 -0800, Ben Chobot wrote: > We've enjoyed our FusionIO drives very much. They can do 100k iops > without breaking a sweat. Yeah, performance is excellent. I bet we could get more, but CPU was bottleneck in our test, since it was just a demo server :( -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ Po

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-08 Thread Ben Chobot
On Mar 8, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Greg Smith wrote: > Ben Chobot wrote: >> We've enjoyed our FusionIO drives very much. They can do 100k iops without >> breaking a sweat. Just make sure you shut them down cleanly - it can up to >> 30 minutes per card to recover from a crash/plug pull test. > > Ye

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-08 Thread Greg Smith
Ben Chobot wrote: We've enjoyed our FusionIO drives very much. They can do 100k iops without breaking a sweat. Just make sure you shut them down cleanly - it can up to 30 minutes per card to recover from a crash/plug pull test. Yeah...I got into an argument with Kenny Gorman over my concerns

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-08 Thread Ben Chobot
We've enjoyed our FusionIO drives very much. They can do 100k iops without breaking a sweat. Just make sure you shut them down cleanly - it can up to 30 minutes per card to recover from a crash/plug pull test. I also have serious questions about their longevity and failure mode when the flash

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-08 Thread Łukasz Jagiełło
2010/3/8 Devrim GÜNDÜZ : > Hi, > > I have a FusionIO drive to test for a few days. I already ran iozone and > bonnie++ against it. Does anyone have more suggestions for it? > > It is a single drive (unfortunately). vdbench -- Łukasz Jagiełło System Administrator G-Forces Web Management Polska sp

Re: [PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-08 Thread Yeb Havinga
Devrim GÜNDÜZ wrote: Hi, I have a FusionIO drive Cool!! to test for a few days. I already ran iozone and bonnie++ against it. Does anyone have more suggestions for it? Oracle has a tool to test drives specifically for database loads kinds called orion - its free software and comes with a

[PERFORM] Testing FusionIO

2010-03-08 Thread Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Hi, I have a FusionIO drive to test for a few days. I already ran iozone and bonnie++ against it. Does anyone have more suggestions for it? It is a single drive (unfortunately). Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer PostgreSQL RPM Repository: http