On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
> How about for serving up CDROM and DVD images (genunix.org). Even two
> 32Gb drives in a ZFS mirrored config would give you 20K+ read OPs/Sec
> - as compared to a 10k RPM SCSI drive that starts to fall-over at 400
> read IOPS. This type is workload is way
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Where's the beef?
>>
>> I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU
>> "announcements" which don't even reveal the number of cores. No
>> prices and funny numbers that the writers of
>> technical article
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
>>
>> > It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the
>> > latest SSD product announce
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Seriously, I don't even care about the cost. Even with the smallest
> capacity, four of those gives me 128GB of write cache supporting 680MB/s and
> 40k IOPS. Show me a hardware raid controller that can even come close to
> that. Four of those will strain even 10GB/s In
> Where's the beef?
>
> I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU
> "announcements" which don't even reveal the number of cores. No
> prices and funny numbers that the writers of
> technical articles can't seem to get straight.
>
> Obviously these are a significant
Bob Friesenhahn writes:
>
> The SSD drives will work well for a boot drive, or a non-volatile
> transaction cache, but will be dramatically more expensive for storage
> than traditional hard drives. This must be why Intel is focusing on
> laptop users and not on enterprise storage.
>
The swe
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>>
>> SSDs + ZFS - a marriage made in (computer) heaven!
>
> Where's the beef?
>
> I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU
> "announcements" which don't even reveal the number of cores. No
> prices and funny numbers that the writers of tec
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Tim wrote:
>
> I don't know about that. I just went from an SSD back to a SATA drive
> because the SSD started failing in less than a month (I'm having troubles
> believing this great write-leveling they talk about is working
> properly...). And the SATA drive is dog slow in
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Bob Friesenhahn <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
>
> > It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the
> > latest SSD product announcements. No pricing yet ... but the specs
> > will push computer system IO ban
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
> It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the
> latest SSD product announcements. No pricing yet ... but the specs
> will push computer system IO bandwidth performance to numbers only
> possible today with extremely expensive RAM based
It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the
latest SSD product announcements. No pricing yet ... but the specs
will push computer system IO bandwidth performance to numbers only
possible today with extremely expensive RAM based disk subsystems.
SSDs + ZFS - a marriage made
11 matches
Mail list logo
