fusionio.com has the SSD killer. not that expensive neither. just
twice or triple the ssd.
Best.
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Karl Wettin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Related, I've been considering filesystem based filters on SSD. That ought
> to be rather fast, consume no memory and be as si
Related, I've been considering filesystem based filters on SSD. That
ought to be rather fast, consume no memory and be as simple as a
RandomAccessFile. I didn't spend to much time on it, gave up when I
couldn't figure out when it made sense to close the file. Perhaps it
would be nice with a
Michael McCandless wrote:
I'd be curious how much of a performance difference you see between
the different SSD drives.
This test was with OCZ "Core Series" but previous tests were with
different SSDs right?
EG Intel just released a new 80 GB SSD (X25-M) which is getting rave
reviews, eve
I'd be curious how much of a performance difference you see between
the different SSD drives.
This test was with OCZ "Core Series" but previous tests were with
different SSDs right?
EG Intel just released a new 80 GB SSD (X25-M) which is getting rave
reviews, even compared to the OCZ "c
Eric Bowman wrote:
Hi all,
We stuck a 60 GB OCZ "Core Series" SSD in a Dell T5400 (dual quadcore,
16GB RAM, SATA II 7200 RPM disk) and did some comparisons between
running with our index on disk, vs. on SSD. I can't really talk about
what the app does, but I can share the difference in perfo
Hi all,
We stuck a 60 GB OCZ "Core Series" SSD in a Dell T5400 (dual quadcore,
16GB RAM, SATA II 7200 RPM disk) and did some comparisons between
running with our index on disk, vs. on SSD. I can't really talk about
what the app does, but I can share the difference in performance; see
enclose
