Re: SSD + RAID - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Scott Marlowe
Subject Re: SSD + RAID
Date
Msg-id dcc563d11002221821p773906a5hf3d3ffaf39bbddc6@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SSD + RAID  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: SSD + RAID
List pgsql-performance
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Mark Mielke wrote:
>>
>> I had read the above when posted, and then looked up SRAM. SRAM seems to
>> suggest it will hold the data even after power loss, but only for a period
>> of time. As long as power can restore within a few minutes, it seemed like
>> this would be ok?
>
> The normal type of RAM everyone uses is DRAM, which requires constrant
> "refresh" cycles to keep it working and is pretty power hungry as a result.
>  Power gone, data gone an instant later.

Actually, oddly enough, per bit stored dram is much lower power usage
than sram, because it only has something like 2 transistors per bit,
while sram needs something like 4 or 5 (it's been a couple decades
since I took the classes on each).  Even with the constant refresh,
dram has a lower power draw than sram.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: SSD + RAID
Next
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: SSD + RAID