9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J.R. Mauro" <jrm8005@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] threads vs forks
Date: Wed,  4 Mar 2009 22:32:55 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3aaafc130903041932t1008d7f1ue0ed339d47e3274f@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13426df10903040914q5b80031ene90d95d9dd53a19a@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:14 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 8:52 AM, J.R. Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Now I haven't tested an SSD for performance, but I know they are
>> better.
>
> Well that I don't understand at all. Is this "faith-based" performance
> measurement? :-)

No, I have seen several benchmarks. The benchmarks I haven't seen are
ones for "how long does it take to actually break these drives?" from
anyone other than the manufacturer.

>
> I have a friend who is doing lots of SSD testing and they're not
> always better. For some cases, you pay a whole lot more for 2x greater
> throughput.
>
> it's not as simple as "know they are better".

What types of things degrade their performance? I'm interested in
seeing other data than the handful of benchmarks I've seen. I imagine
writes would be the culprit since you have to erase a whole block
first?

>
>>If I got one, this problem would likely subside, but I'm not
>> convinced that SSDs are durable enough, despite what the manufacturers
>> say. I haven't seen many torture tests on them, but the fact that
>> erasing a block destroys it a little bit is scary. I do a lot of
>> sustained writes with my typical desktop workload over the same files,
>> and I'd rather not trust them to something that is delicate enough to
>> need filesystem algorithms to be optimized for so they don't "wear
>> out".
>
> in most cases write leveling is not in the file system. It's in the
> hardware or in a powerpc that is in the SSD controller.  It's worth
> your doing some reading here.

I've seen a lot about optimizing the next-generation filesystems for
flash. Despite the claims that the hardware-based solutions will be
satisfactory, there are a lot of people interested in making existing
filesystems smarter about SSDs, both for wear and for optimizing
read/write.

Beyond that, though, I feel very shaky just hearing the term "wear
leveling". I've had more flash-based devices fail on me than hard
drives, but maybe I'm just crazy and the technology has gotten decent
enough in the past couple years to allay my worrying. It would just be
nice to see a bit stronger alternative being pushed as hard as SSDs.

>
> That said, I sure would like to have a fusion IO card for venti. From
> what my friend is telling me the fusion card would be ideal for venti
> -- as long as we keep only the arenas  on it.
>
> ron
>
>



  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-03-05  3:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-03 11:52 hugo rivera
2009-03-03 15:19 ` David Leimbach
2009-03-03 15:32   ` Uriel
2009-03-03 16:15     ` hugo rivera
2009-03-03 15:33   ` hugo rivera
2009-03-03 18:11   ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-03-03 18:38     ` Bakul Shah
2009-03-06 18:47       ` Roman V Shaposhnik
2009-03-06 20:38         ` David Leimbach
2009-03-07  8:00           ` Bakul Shah
2009-03-07  0:21         ` Bakul Shah
2009-03-07  2:20           ` Brian L. Stuart
2009-03-03 23:08     ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-03 23:15       ` Uriel
2009-03-03 23:23         ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-03 23:54           ` Devon H. O'Dell
2009-03-04  0:33             ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-04  0:54               ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-04  1:54                 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-04  3:18                   ` James Tomaschke
2009-03-04  3:30                     ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-04  4:44                       ` James Tomaschke
2009-03-04  5:05                         ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-04  5:50                           ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-04  6:08                             ` andrey mirtchovski
2009-03-04 16:52                             ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-04 17:14                               ` ron minnich
2009-03-04 17:27                                 ` William Josephson
2009-03-04 18:15                                 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-05  3:32                                 ` J.R. Mauro [this message]
2009-03-05  3:39                                   ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-05  3:55                                   ` William K. Josephson
2009-03-05  4:00                                     ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-05  4:16                                       ` William K. Josephson
2009-03-07  3:01                                         ` William Josephson
2009-03-07  3:31                                           ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07  6:00                                             ` William Josephson
2009-03-07 13:58                                               ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 14:37                                                 ` William Josephson
2009-03-07 15:05                                                   ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 15:28                                                     ` William K. Josephson
2009-03-07  5:00                                           ` lucio
2009-03-07  5:08                                             ` William Josephson
2009-03-07  5:19                                               ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07  5:45                                                 ` [9fans] Flash William K. Josephson
2009-03-07 14:42                                                   ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 14:56                                                     ` William Josephson
2009-03-07 15:39                                                     ` Russ Cox
2009-03-07 16:34                                                       ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07  5:24                                               ` [9fans] threads vs forks lucio
2009-03-04  5:19                   ` David Leimbach
2009-03-04  2:47                 ` John Barham
2009-03-04  5:24                 ` blstuart
2009-03-04  5:37                   ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-04 16:29                   ` Roman V Shaposhnik
2009-03-04 16:56                   ` john
2009-03-06  9:39             ` maht
2009-03-04  5:07     ` David Leimbach
2009-03-04  5:35     ` John Barham
2009-03-03 16:00 ` ron minnich
2009-03-03 16:28   ` hugo rivera
2009-03-03 17:31     ` ron minnich
2009-03-03 16:47 ` John Barham
2009-03-04  9:37   ` Vincent Schut
2009-03-04  9:58     ` hugo rivera
2009-03-04 10:30       ` Vincent Schut
2009-03-04 10:45         ` hugo rivera
2009-03-04 11:15           ` Vincent Schut
2009-03-04 11:33             ` hugo rivera
2009-03-04 13:23               ` Uriel
2009-03-04 14:57         ` ron minnich

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3aaafc130903041932t1008d7f1ue0ed339d47e3274f@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jrm8005@gmail.com \
    --cc=9fans@9fans.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).