Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (933 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] openSUSE on SSD?
  • From: Sandy Drobic <opensuse@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 18:08:40 +0200
  • Message-id: <4C053088.4020107@xxxxxxxxx>
Am 01.06.2010 13:53, schrieb Adam Tauno Williams:
On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 13:25 +0200, C wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:58, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
11.3. I've been doing some reading, and see a lot of conflicting
info... in one place I see notes that you must set noatime and you
cannot(should not)

"noatime" or a near work-alike [relatime?] is the default in modern
kernels.

This is one of those conflicts of information I see. Some people say
it's a default so no worries.. then the next says.. no way, you have
to set this option or... the world will end... or your SSD will
fail... whichever comes first.

The world will end - the question is just "when?" :)

There is no harm in using the noatime setting; I've been using noatime
on all my production servers and my own laptop/workstation for years
with no problem. No modern application cares about atime and it isn't
even useful for auditing.

In large part because the hype has dyed down. SSDs offer some specific
advantages in some cases; and none in most cases. Just a more
expensive solution for [less] mass-storage. Unless you have a real I/O
bottleneck problem - don't bother. Most of the people I've met who are
using them are doing so because they are the cool-new-thing.
There is that, but... on computers I've seen running on SSD drives,
the boot cycle, and application startup is a LOT faster.

Really? I've seen demonstrations of that and not been impressed. You
could get, IMNSHO, a bigger performance boost by spending that same
amount of money on a lot more RAM. I've got spinning disks and 6GB of
RAM and apps start pretty close to instantly. An order-of-magnitude
difference I doubt would even be noticeable.

I also doubt that a normal user will notice any big difference, but there
there is one case that makes me eager to try out ssd: hosting virtual machines
on a ssd raid.
Currently the number of VMs I can host on a server is limited by
a) the amount of RAM
b) the I/O of the storage device

Just a few VMs on a SATA raid, and I already see noticable CPU Wait. SAS hdds
make a huge difference already. SSD has many more IO operations per second, so
it should perform much better for many concurrent IO operations than a spindle
drive. Eventually even cached write operations have to be synched to the disk.
So a storage kept busy by many VMs should really profit from a ssd.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >