Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase 12»»

All Flash Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Thursday, January 03, 2013 12:14 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 2:02 PM
Points: 32,834, Visits: 14,974
Comments posted to this topic are about the item All Flash






Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1402208
Posted Thursday, January 03, 2013 2:50 AM


UDP Broadcaster

UDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP Broadcaster

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 2:16 AM
Points: 1,498, Visits: 981
Nice idea (the tempdb thing) - I can think of one inherited application this could easily buy some time with. I'll investigate, cheers.
Post #1402255
Posted Thursday, January 03, 2013 7:52 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 19, 2013 8:44 AM
Points: 45, Visits: 283
TempDB was where we first experimented with SSD's on our accounting system and it made a huge difference by greatly improving the I/O latency (we have a lot of EDI feeds into it). While I'd be first to say "write better code" it's usually not an option with most vendor's software so you opt for throwing more or better hardware at it, be it RAM or SSD's or some kind of indexing strategy. We will be spending a lot on SSD's this year where they will be dedicated to critical DBMS servers on our SAN, because like you said it can be a very cost effective tool.
Post #1402393
Posted Thursday, January 03, 2013 9:32 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 2:38 PM
Points: 20,485, Visits: 14,142
I think the tempdb suggestion is an excellent idea. It could be a very good investment.



Jason AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
I have given a name to my pain...
MCM SQL Server


SQL RNNR

Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw
Posting Data Etiquette - Jeff Moden
Hidden RBAR - Jeff Moden
VLFs and the Tran Log - Kimberly Tripp
Post #1402450
Posted Thursday, January 03, 2013 12:23 PM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, March 10, 2014 5:44 PM
Points: 2,225, Visits: 1,258
Will our code skills get better?

Over the years I have seen people come onboard who are really good and getting better. They stay a while and are gone. If you are lucky you can keep them a few years. Then you start over again. New person, new skill set, same learning curve, same complex business practices. Once they achieve mastery, they again are gone and you cycle again and again. All the time you are using their product which might not be getting better at all.

So if some are going to get the increase in speed or what we use to call throughput you might only get it by advancing the technology. The idea of throwing more hardware at a solution has not always been the best idea, but some have no option. TO this this is a great idea.


Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
Post #1402503
Posted Thursday, January 03, 2013 2:32 PM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:05 PM
Points: 1,334, Visits: 3,068
Just remember three main things about SSD's before you run off and start putting stuff on them:

1. SSDs tend to wear out. The individual bits can’t be erased and written to again after a while. Flash memory has a limited number of times that data can be written to a location.

2. SSDs are expensive: The price per gigabyte is significantly more expensive than traditional drives. For example, a 2TB HDD costs around $100, which is exactly how much a 60GB SSD costs. You get way more storage for your buck with an HDD. SSDs are more expensive to produce, so the MSRP tends to be higher than that of HDDs.

3. SSDs has lower storage capacity: Compared to HDDs, SSDs have much less storage capacity. SSDs have not been made in real high capacities yet to my knowledge. So, you will probably have to spend more money for more storage.


Also, regarding TEMPDB please remember that tempdb is write heavy, and SSD's have a limited write life. I'm not saying that this can't work, people are doing it, I'm just saying it is something you need to be aware of.


"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ..."
Post #1402571
Posted Thursday, January 03, 2013 4:44 PM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 11:38 AM
Points: 2,868, Visits: 1,711
The thing with traditional HDDs is that not all the space is usable due to the need for multiple spindles to deliver throughput so it isn't as simple a case as saying HDD = £x per unit and SSD = £y per unit.

If you are using SSD for locally attached storage then fantastic. If they are going in a SAN then remember the SAN header will probably get overwhelmed by the throughput.


LinkedIn Profile
Newbie on www.simple-talk.com
Post #1402614
Posted Friday, January 04, 2013 7:58 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 19, 2013 8:44 AM
Points: 45, Visits: 283
David.Poole (1/3/2013)
The thing with traditional HDDs is that not all the space is usable due to the need for multiple spindles to deliver throughput so it isn't as simple a case as saying HDD = £x per unit and SSD = £y per unit.

If you are using SSD for locally attached storage then fantastic. If they are going in a SAN then remember the SAN header will probably get overwhelmed by the throughput.


This is an excellent point, but probably manageable from the SAN's buffer. One of the first things I learned was that this was usually set too low for SQL Server. It varies from product to product as I recall.
Post #1402890
Posted Friday, January 04, 2013 10:30 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 11:38 AM
Points: 2,868, Visits: 1,711
Forgot to mention that pre SQL2012 putting TempDB on local storage in a cluster was possible but definitely not supported or recommended by Microsoft.

LinkedIn Profile
Newbie on www.simple-talk.com
Post #1403001
Posted Friday, January 04, 2013 11:05 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, April 21, 2014 10:38 AM
Points: 1,202, Visits: 2,663
I have heard some horror stories a year or so ago about SSDs.... the one guy I know who works for MSFT as a SQL Server guru said, at that point in time he'd shy away from them. He knew of a couple of stories that they were very fast but all of a sudden they failed. Again, that was a couple of years ago. I know we use it for one of our high end Oracle DBs but it was very expensive when we got it.





Post #1403025
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 12»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse