| From: | Daniel Loureiro <daniel(at)termasa(dot)com(dot)br> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Vaibhav Kaushal <vaibhavkaushal123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Anyone for SSDs? |
| Date: | 2010-12-11 00:37:23 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimF2vxCX2W_Gk4vFnowmMoV+MnQVNUEND+mWM1G@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> You can believe whatever you want, that doesn't make it true.
completely agree. Like yours, Its just my point of view, not the reality.
I agree with most points here, but I wondering how many good ideas are
killed with the thought: "this will be a performance killer with so
many random access, lets discarded it". If in 80's the sequential
access has more cost compared with random access (ok, there's not the
SSD case), will be the PostgreSQL in the same design that it have
nowadays ?
--
Daniel Loureiro.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hamza Bin Sohail | 2010-12-11 00:39:16 | Re: would hw acceleration help postgres (databases in general) ? |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-12-11 00:37:16 | Re: unlogged tables |