ly-To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>"
>> mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>
>> Date: Wednesday, August 8, 2012 7:16 AM
>> To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>"
>> mailto:user@cas
rvin Denmian darvin.denm...@gmail.com>>
> > Reply-To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>"
> mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>
> > Date: Wednesday, August 8, 2012 7:16 AM
> > To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:use
g>"
> mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>
> Date: Wednesday, August 8, 2012 7:16 AM
> To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>"
> mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: Use of SSD for commitlog
>
> Thanks f
dra.apache.org>"
mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>
Date: Wednesday, August 8, 2012 7:16 AM
To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>"
mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: Use of SSD for commitlog
Thanks for your reply Dean,
considering
Thanks for your reply Dean,
considering your reply maybe I use a 15k RPM SCSI Disk, I think it'll
perform better than a SSD disk.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Hiller, Dean wrote:
> Probably not since it is sequential writes….(ie. Seek performance is the
> big hit and if it is sequential
Probably not since it is sequential writes….(ie. Seek performance is the big
hit and if it is sequential it should not be seeking and is about just as fast
as an SSD in theory). In practice, I have not measure the performance of one
vs. the other though…that I always the best way to go.(you cou
