Gilbo

New SSD disk from Gigabyte

Recommended Posts

I can see many possible uses for a unit like this, specially considering its price. The raid 0 question is not that for out, if you need 8GB you might raid 0 two of those. What I think would be really interesting would be a raid 1 setup together with a 2.5" drive, that would bring much greater reliability, in read lots write little scenarios that would be great, I can think of a few database applications that would love to have some tables on that kind of storage device.

By the way: Would most raid-controllers benefit from such a unbalanced setup (mem+hd)? Which do and which don't?

I think the main point is ease of use and cheap price, anyone with need for a few GB of fast storage can do it, and although system ram is better it is difficult to add and extra 4GB of ram once you start running out of dimm-sockets.

Are there any good software for doing a drive to drive copy BEFORE the system starts booting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way: Would most raid-controllers benefit from such a unbalanced setup (mem+hd)? Which do and which don't?

206546[/snapback]

Your writes are as slow as the slowest drive. Doing it any other way would defeat the purpose of RAID 1 :blink: .

Are there any good software for doing a drive to drive copy BEFORE the system starts booting?

What would be the point? So you could speed up your boot time? I think copying 4GB off a disk before you start booting would slow the whole process down a whole lot more than speed it up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why? The SSD is already going to have latencies about a million times faster than most hard drives and max out the connection in the process.

206509[/snapback]

You need to visualize the bandwidth "tree" that exists between a CPU and these soft disks. As an example, for a chipset that has integrated SATA on the Northbridge (most modern Intel 9xx):

CPU <--{via one Front Side Bus}--> NorthBridge <--{via multiple SATA Channels}--> Disks

Basically, the FSB has a MUCH higher bandwidth than a single SATA channel. Since SATA is a point-to-point channle (1 disk per channel), we need to use multiple SATA channels to utilize more bandwidth. This is regardless of the fact that the memory chips on the Gigabyte are way faster than the SATA channels - as long as they can operate at full SATA I speeds any excess speed they have is wasted. So we would need to use MULTIPLE SATA channels to increase our soft disk bandwidth, up to the point at which we either run out of PCI card slots to power the soft disks, OR overload the FSB interface between the Northbridge and the CPU. I'm sure SOMEONE here can do the math better than I to figure out the relation of SATA I channels to FSB upper bandwidth.

So yeah, these things DO look to be benefitted from a RAID setup - either RAID 0 or even RAID 5. I'm really curious to see what the write penalty of RAID 5 would be on a soft disk...

Future Shock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Writes would probably be limited by the xor calculations. I'm thinking software RAID would potentially be faster, although you may need an SMP machine to realize that potential.

;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was originally referring to RAID 0 as a way to combine the capacity of two of these things, as being cheaper than using DIMMS twice as big. It was an economic argument, not a performance one.

That said, there will be a real performance benefit to RAID 0 on these. Maybe not double the storage performance, depending heavily on the chipset and SATA controller.

I really don't see the point in RAID 5 on a device that will wipe itself after 16 hours without power. Your data is at far more risk from that (all drives dying at once) than it is from individual drive failure. Regular (frequent?) drive image backups to hard disk (or DVD, or whatever) would seem essential, so who cares if RAID 0 is a little more risky?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was originally referring to RAID 0 as a way to combine the capacity of two of these things, as being cheaper than using DIMMS twice as big. It was an economic argument, not a performance one.

That said, there will be a real performance benefit to RAID 0 on these. Maybe not double the storage performance, depending heavily on the chipset and SATA controller.

I really don't see the point in RAID 5 on a device that will wipe itself after 16 hours without power. Your data is at far more risk from that (all drives dying at once) than it is from individual drive failure. Regular (frequent?) drive image backups to hard disk (or DVD, or whatever) would seem essential, so who cares if RAID 0 is a little more risky?

206564[/snapback]

with RAID 5, I was just thinking in terms of data integrity, i.e., having some xor checksums to ensure that the data being un-RAIDed was correct. It's not like this thing is a well-proven solution or anything! I guess that, as with all storage, the question is "what is the value of that data?" when planning a solution. And you have a point in that any soft disk data BETTER not be that important...

FS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way: Would most raid-controllers benefit from such a unbalanced setup (mem+hd)? Which do and which don't?

206546[/snapback]

Your writes are as slow as the slowest drive. Doing it any other way would defeat the purpose of RAID 1 :blink: .

Are there any good software for doing a drive to drive copy BEFORE the system starts booting?

What would be the point? So you could speed up your boot time? I think copying 4GB off a disk before you start booting would slow the whole process down a whole lot more than speed it up!

206548[/snapback]

I think this would alow the information to be saved to Physical storage during shut down then with the software he is asking about would then copy that information back making the 16 hour longjevity not an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way: Would most raid-controllers benefit from such a unbalanced setup (mem+hd)? Which do and which don't?

206546[/snapback]

Your writes are as slow as the slowest drive. Doing it any other way would defeat the purpose of RAID 1 :blink: .

Are there any good software for doing a drive to drive copy BEFORE the system starts booting?

What would be the point? So you could speed up your boot time? I think copying 4GB off a disk before you start booting would slow the whole process down a whole lot more than speed it up!

206548[/snapback]

1. Yes my writes will always be slow, but reads will be really fast, and some systems are 95% reads and 5% writes, so if the controller optimizes reads to the fastest drive this will be really great.

2. Not to speed up the boot process, but to make sure that the two mirrored drives (the SSD and the HD) are actually consistent with each other, since many server applications run as services I would like to make sure that the mirror is ok before any thing else starts. Since reboots are rare performance is of little interest although copying 4GB shouldn't take that long either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way: Would most raid-controllers benefit from such a unbalanced setup (mem+hd)? Which do and which don't?

206546[/snapback]

Your writes are as slow as the slowest drive. Doing it any other way would defeat the purpose of RAID 1 :blink: .

Are there any good software for doing a drive to drive copy BEFORE the system starts booting?

What would be the point? So you could speed up your boot time? I think copying 4GB off a disk before you start booting would slow the whole process down a whole lot more than speed it up!

206548[/snapback]

I think this would alow the information to be saved to Physical storage during shut down then with the software he is asking about would then copy that information back making the 16 hour longjevity not an issue.

206573[/snapback]

Actually I wouldn't trust the information to be written before shutdown, because thing fail. But with raid 1 that wouldn't be a problem because any change would be written directly to the HD too (or two drives for the wise).

But the main point was to get security and maintain great read performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in shock! Sheer shock... honold's back :P OK, now I really have to revive the 'Akiba' thread ;-)

Hmm, poorman's form of one of these

http://www.dgk.com.ar/P2-CARD.htm

low cost HD acquisition, the 2008 Beijing Olympics, and the iPod will drive the prices down on these instead... 128GB by 2008?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that SOUND like Honold to any of you???

FS

EDIT - yeah, it does...I had to go read his last 20 posts to be sure...

WELCOME BACK!

Edited by Future Shock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does that SOUND like Honold to any of you???

206595[/snapback]

LOL, Future Shock ;).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello, all. i did 'come back' a few months ago to post something about pentium m adapters for desktop boards, and to wit there was no fanfare. i'll try to time things more optimally like this in the future!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honold,

Do you remember my Jay-Z sig line from last summer?

They say they never miss you 'till your dead or your gone..."

Well, you know we miss you...

Future Shock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah sorry, the LA 18TV weather women for the Mandarin News hour was doing 'Da Weather' :blink:

Some additional links, knowing full well 8bits doesn't not = 1GB :) . 8bits/8GB chips????

Panasonic HGX-200, is a poor man's 1080p24p, pooooor quality lens HD solution that doesn't compress as much as HDV (which means a better picture after doing multiple digital manipulations)... even though broadcast, or blue-ray HD (currently) is Friggin compressed HDV! Viper Fieldstream 2k uncompressed HD strait off the CCD sensors is 2.2Gigabits/sec data rate!!! In other words, for the time being for high-end HiDef caputure, we need hard-disk RAID, pure and simple.

So I spoke to "Joe DiGennaro. Luckily, he was available. Joe has as much experience with the Viper as anyone, maybe more, so our concern with the camera could be put to rest while we tried to develop a comfort zone with the available recording mechanisms" at the LA HDfest 2003, after the showing of the 1st Russian HD feature 'Russian Ark' (just like to name drop... more on that in the SWIII thread). The Viper can send the signal of 2k uncompressed HD to a hard drive RAID assuming it can handle 2.2+ Gigabytes/sec. Now imagine what future HD like the Dalsa 4k (available for rent now) or 'ultra HD' requires as far as storage capacity and speed!!! No current or future solid state memory, volitile or not, can handle that.

http://millimeter.com/digitalfilm/video_adrift_sea_pixels_2/

Still for broadcast (low res ;) ) compressed HD, has definite possibilties, especially in time for the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

http://www.pcworld.com/resource/article/0,...,RSS,RSS,00.asp

Panasonic's ProHD 100Mbs format is what ABC and others are using to capture at 720p 'medium' HD resolution (SWIII was done at 1080p), but this is good enough for broadcast TV or current/near future HD-DVD's.

http://www.pcworld.com/resource/article/0,...,RSS,RSS,00.asp

Still, even with DVCProHD at 100Mbps, you'll still need to back up to HD; and for that we now have 120GB laptop drive from Seagate (this fall?), and currently shipping 100GB Hitachi 7.2k drives. Rant: when will I ever see laptop reviews?

http://www.globalsources.com/gsol/I/Multif...00000060197.htm

http://www.dgk.com.ar/P2-CARD.htm

60Mega BITS/sec is not really very fast.

http://www.reed-electronics.com/electronic...e/CA502345.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hello, all.  i did 'come back' a few months ago to post something about pentium m adapters for desktop boards, and to wit there was no fanfare.  i'll try to time things more optimally like this in the future!

206606[/snapback]

Welcome back!

THG has a review on the adapter with a P-M@2.13GHz. When O/C to 2.56GHz it was beating the mighty Athlon FX-55 and the P4EE in most benchmarks. Very interesting indeed. (THG P-M vs P4)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But the main point was to get security and maintain great read performance.

206576[/snapback]

Security? RAID has nothing to do with security.

206581[/snapback]

Poor choice of words then. In case anybody missunderstood me what I meant was to make data persistent and get great read performance.

(ok I know nothing is everlasting and I should make backups because raid is not backup but I mean less volatile then keeping the data on the SSD only)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I find this drive interesting in another sense: silent PCs. Having a 4 to 8 GB boot drive that is noiseless and very fast would appeal to many geeks like me. I could put my conventional drive in standby so it would spin only when backing up the RAM disk or when accessing large files.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now