1 SSD VS 2 WD RED drives for a server that is used basically for pictures and movies. What one would perform better. I know obviously there is more redundancy with 2 WD RED drives. But that off to the side. For just pure speed, what would perform faster? Any one use a SSD in a server and how is it working for them?
-
Important Announcement for the TrueNAS Community.
The TrueNAS Community has now been moved. This forum will now become READ-ONLY for historical purposes. Please feel free to join us on the new TrueNAS Community Forums
- Status
BigDave
FreeNAS Enthusiast
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2013
- Messages
- 2,479
Solid State Drives are being used in servers today and they out perform hard disk drives for pure speed.
I use an SSD for a boot device and this works very well for me, many people in here use SSDs for
slog/cache/jails in their servers and have increased performance/reliability.
Having said all that, as a storage device, the cost per GB of a well built SSD is way more than "spinning rust".
The cost is what drives the popularity.
I use an SSD for a boot device and this works very well for me, many people in here use SSDs for
slog/cache/jails in their servers and have increased performance/reliability.
Having said all that, as a storage device, the cost per GB of a well built SSD is way more than "spinning rust".
The cost is what drives the popularity.
depasseg
FreeNAS Replicant
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2014
- Messages
- 2,874
Hands down the SSD wins by at least an order of magnitude.
Tons of enterprises use SSDs now instead of 15k drives (and soon 10k drives will be the same price as SSDs so they will be gone soon too).
Okay. I am thinking about getting like a 512gb M.2 for my laptop and I would re-purpose my 1TB SSD in my server. But i didn't know if that was a thing, if they died quickly to where it was not worth it. But sounds like its a good idea to give it a try!
depasseg
FreeNAS Replicant
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2014
- Messages
- 2,874
As for "dying", ssd's fail differently than disks. The data on them doesn't disappear, they instead fail to write. Look at the specs of your SSD. The measurement you are looking for is (amount of Data written) per day. It's usually measured in full drive writes, or a number of TB/day. If you exceed this, then you might suffer failure sooner rather than later. Generally, enterprise SSD's have a higher write capacity than consumer SSDs.
SSDs do fail differently, and what you describe is how one would hope they die. This does not always seem to be the case however, at least not for consumer drives. Techreport.com's endurance test pushed consumer SSDs far past their intended endurance, and when drives failed they were often unable to access the data.
http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead
SSDs do have a much lower failure rate than HDDs. If they survive the burn-in they usually live a long and happy life. If you use consumer SSDs make sure you do your own over-provisioning (an additional 10-25% can be necessary), both to prolong their life (improve wear leveling) and to keep performance consistent (prevent unnecessary garbage collection) as the drive fills up.
Even when using SSD-only arrays make sure you have backups! And keep an eye on the "reallocated sectors" SMART attribute.
The SSD absolutely win the performance part, but ...
how many ssd vs. how many hdd?
If you have 10 mirrored vdevs of wdreds in your freenas, even with 10G the HDDs will not be the bottleneck for simple copying (not iops though).
If you have *just* Gbit, 4 WDreds will feel as fast as 2 SSDs in your FN (if you have enough ram) for just storing some pictures and movies
Depends on the workload what to choose
how many ssd vs. how many hdd?
If you have 10 mirrored vdevs of wdreds in your freenas, even with 10G the HDDs will not be the bottleneck for simple copying (not iops though).
If you have *just* Gbit, 4 WDreds will feel as fast as 2 SSDs in your FN (if you have enough ram) for just storing some pictures and movies
Depends on the workload what to choose
- Status
