Re: SSD Performance Quesiton - How Much Faster that Spinning SAS

[John Jones <chianime@xxxxxxxxx>]

Note the Random Read and Random Write graphs on this page:
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3607&p=4

Realize that the Western Digital Raptor drive is a 10K RPM unit; the others
are all SSDs.  And what they said about latency when the SSDs range from 0.2
to 0.47: "I had to remove the WD VelociRaptor because its read latency threw
the chart's scale off, it averaged 17.3 ms here."

At 10 grand for 70GB, there's no way my management would go for it even
though the performance would be hugely better while power consumption would
go down.  IBM is definitely gouging right now.  I would advise you to wait
if you can.

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Kirk Goins <kgoins@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Sue Baker wrote:
> > This changes when SSDs are installed so hot data does get moved
> > to the SSDs and cold data is left on spinning disks.  The target
> > is to get approximately 1/2 of the reads coming from SSDs versus
> > spinning disks.
> I know Solid State Disks ( SSD's ) are new. The Online Sales Manual
> doesn't give specs on how much faster they are. It just says something
> to the affect of 'much faster'  I was wondering how much faster compared
> to the standard SAS drives. List price on the SSDs are $10,000 each for
> 69.9GB.
>
> --
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.