On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 02:11:31PM -0800, Moshe Vainer wrote:
> >PS: For data that you want to mostly archive, consider using Amazon
> >Web Services (AWS) S3 service. Right now there is no charge to push
> >data into the cloud and its $0.15/gigabyte to keep it there. Do a
> >quick (back of the napk
>PS: For data that you want to mostly archive, consider using Amazon
>Web Services (AWS) S3 service. Right now there is no charge to push
>data into the cloud and its $0.15/gigabyte to keep it there. Do a
>quick (back of the napkin) calculation on what storage you can get for
>$30/month and factor
Having gotten back to the Rep and asked further questions, I'm forced to
agree - the rep doesn't know what they're talking about.
It does look like the Intel based 40G Kinsgston may not yet be available
in australia.
What a drag. :-)
T
On 6/01/2010 10:46 PM, Al Hopper wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5,
> meandering off topic here ...
>
> i use one of those 64G kingston jmicron/toshiba drives in my mac.
>
> The "stuttering" problems attributed to the older jmicron drives are
> non-existent with this one in my experience.
>
>
This is great news. I've read this but it's good to know that someone on
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 08:33:23PM -0600, Al Hopper wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Thomas Burgess wrote:
> >
> > I'm PRETTY sure the kingston drives i ordered are as good/better
> >
> > i just didnt' know that they weren't "good enough"
>
> I disagree that those drives are "good enough"
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Eric D. Mudama
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 6 at 14:56, Tristan Ball wrote:
>>
>> For those searching list archives, the SNV125-S2/40GB given below is not
>> based on the Intel controller.
>>
>> I queried Kingston directly about this because there appears to be so
>> much
On 06 January, 2010 - Thomas Burgess sent me these 5,8K bytes:
> I think the confusing part is that the 64gb version seems to use a different
> controller all together
It does.
> I couldn't find any SNV125-S2/40's in stock so i got 3 SNV125-S2/64's
> thinking it would be the same,m only bigger..
I think the confusing part is that the 64gb version seems to use a different
controller all together
I couldn't find any SNV125-S2/40's in stock so i got 3 SNV125-S2/64's
thinking it would be the same,m only bigger.looks like it was stupid on
my part.
now i understand why i got such a good dea
On Wed, Jan 6 at 14:56, Tristan Ball wrote:
For those searching list archives, the SNV125-S2/40GB given below is not
based on the Intel controller.
I queried Kingston directly about this because there appears to be so
much confusion (and I'm considering using these drives!), and I got back
that
website.
Regards,
Tristan
-Original Message-
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
[mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Eric D. Mudama
Sent: Tuesday, 5 January 2010 7:35 PM
To: Thomas Burgess
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] need a f
Chris Du wrote:
> You can use the utility to erase all blocks and regain performance, but it's
> a manual process and quite complex. Windows 7 support TRIM, if SSD firmware
> also supports it, the process is run in the background so you will not notice
> performance degrade. I don't think any
The SNV125-S2/40GB is the "half an X25-M" drive which can be "often"
> found as a bare OEM drive for about $85 w/ rebate.
>
> Kingston does sell rebranded Intel SLC drives as well, but under a
> different model number: SNE-125S2/32 or SNE-125S2/64. I don't believe
> the 64GB Kingston MLC (SNV-125
On Mon, Jan 4 at 22:01, Thomas Burgess wrote:
I guess i got some bad advice then
I was told the kingston snv125-s2 used almost the exact same hardware as
an x25-m and should be considered the "poor mans" x25-m
...
Right, i couldn't find any of the 40 gb's in stock so i ordered the 64
> I disagree that those drives are "good enough". That particular drive
> uses the dreaded JMicron controller - which has a really bad
> reputation. And a poor reputation that it *earned* and deserves.
> Even though these drives use a newer revision of the original JMicron
> part (that basically
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Thomas Burgess wrote:
>
> I'm PRETTY sure the kingston drives i ordered are as good/better
>
> i just didnt' know that they weren't "good enough"
I disagree that those drives are "good enough". That particular drive
uses the dreaded JMicron controller - which has
Fast is a relative term, because even after the first write to the end, they
are still really fast for a small server and the latency is still low <1ms
which is often more important than throughput. The topic said poor mans slog.
The vertexes can be had for $100 and the vertex turbo a little mo
You can use the utility to erase all blocks and regain performance, but it's a
manual process and quite complex. Windows 7 support TRIM, if SSD firmware also
supports it, the process is run in the background so you will not notice
performance degrade. I don't think any other OS supports TRIM.
I
so are you saying that the "degrading problem" with ssd's can be fixed
completely with such a utility?
Don't they STILL wear out and become more or less broken after heavy use
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Chris Du wrote:
> They are fast when they are new. Once all the blocks are written,
>
They are fast when they are new. Once all the blocks are written, performance
degrades significantly. SLC will also degrade over time, but when it needs to
erase blocks and rewrite, it is much faster than MLC. That's why for ZIL, SLC
SSD is prefered.
It's possible to remove MLC ZIL and use wipe
I'm PRETTY sure the kingston drives i ordered are as good/better
i just didnt' know that they weren't "good enough"
Basically, if i have 3 raidz2 groups or 4 raidz groups with a total of 20
7200 RPM drives is using a cheaper MLC drive going to make things WORSE?
thanks for the idea though, i may
Myself and others had good luck with the OCZ vertex. I use two 30GB versions
and they have very high write and read throughputs for such a cheap MLC.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
h
On Jan 4, 2010, at 10:35 AM, Thomas Burgess wrote:
slightly outside of my price range.
I'll either do without or wait till they drop in priceis there a
"second best" option or is this pretty much it?
If you need the separate log, then you can figure the relative latency
gain for latency
On 01/04/10 19:35, Thomas Burgess wrote:
slightly outside of my price range.
I'll either do without or wait till they drop in priceis there a "second
best" option or is this pretty much it?
I guess it depends on your workload and your performance
expectations/requirements vs budget. For e
slightly outside of my price range.
I'll either do without or wait till they drop in priceis there a "second
best" option or is this pretty much it?
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Chris Du wrote:
> You need SLC SSD for ZIL. The only SLC SSD I'd recommend is Intel X25-E.
> Others are eithe
You need SLC SSD for ZIL. The only SLC SSD I'd recommend is Intel X25-E. Others
are either too expensive or much slower than Intel.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensola
On Jan 4, 2010, at 10:00 AM, Thomas Burgess wrote:
I'm not 100% sure i'm going to need a separate SSD for my ZIL but if
i did want to look for one, i was wondering if anyone could suggest/
recommend a few budget options.
Start with zilstat, which will help you determine if your workload uses
I'm not 100% sure i'm going to need a separate SSD for my ZIL but if i did
want to look for one, i was wondering if anyone could suggest/recommend a
few budget options.
My current hardware is something like this:
intel core2quad 9550
8 gb ddr2 800 unbuffered ECC
3 AOC-SAT2-MV8 controllers
21 720
27 matches
Mail list logo
