Comments on: SandForce 1222 SSD Testing – Part 2: Initial IOPS Results http://www.linux-mag.com/id/8510/ Open Source, Open Standards Sat, 05 Oct 2013 13:48:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: lliseil http://www.linux-mag.com/id/8510/#comment-727487 lliseil Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:29:57 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/?p=8510#comment-727487 Thank you Jeff for publishing this rare and detailed test. > The SSD ... compresses the data before storing it [and, as I understand it, decompress it before passing it over to the applications] > If your data is compressible then [I as uderstand Sandforce-based SSD will give you top-of-the-notch R/W performances along with some storages benefit] Now, does "compressibility" and "compression ratio" compare between Sandforce-based SSD controller and e.g. '7z' or 'tar gzip'? I couldn't find the answer yet. Here is how compressible are some of the main directories on my linux box (tar gzip): Path : uncompressed --> tar.gz compressed (real compressibility in %) /var/log/journal : 590 MB --> 124M (79%) So when stored on a Sandforce based SSD, these same files will take _about_ the same low amount of space? /var/cache : 563 MB --> 560M ( 0%) /var/lib : 56 MB --> 17M (70%) /usr/bin : 340 MB --> 133M (60%) /usr/lib : 1571 MB --> 658M (58%) Or for a single app, e.g open source browser Mozilla Firefox: /usr/lib/firefox/ : 44M --> 23M (48%) Firefox user's profile (with quite a few add-ons) : 38M --> 13M (66%) So real average compressibility is always over 50% --with tar and gzip (but for the packages' cache which isn't used 10 hours a day anyway). Man, not bad at all! So let says I'm looking for an SSD to make any app and daemons just load smooth and fast (and reliably ;) on the main PC I _work_ with. I'll put only the system and users' configuration files on the SSD (while /tmp will be in RAM, swap and data on the HDDs). If "Sandforce compression" is kind of comparable to "tar gzip compression" well, then I should run for a a Sandforce-based, synchronous memory SSD without a glitch of hesitation. And happily let the non Sandforce SSD controller like Crucial or Samsung' for Audio/Video/Games/Windows based uses. Or maybe Sandforce's "compressibility" has a rather different meaning than that of standard file's compression, then it'd be great to have it explained somehow. As without it it is very misleading the average Joe. Another question I have --and pardon my ignorance-- but how does the Sandforce controller deal with multiple parallel compression and decompression of hundred of files, in real life multi-tasking station (from writing to the logs to loading various apps' binaries, libs and configuration files plus backup/synchronization)? Thank you Jeff for publishing this rare and detailed test.

> The SSD … compresses the data before storing it [and, as I understand it, decompress it before passing it over to the applications]
> If your data is compressible then [I as uderstand Sandforce-based SSD will give you top-of-the-notch R/W performances along with some storages benefit]

Now, does “compressibility” and “compression ratio” compare between Sandforce-based SSD controller and e.g. ’7z’ or ‘tar gzip’? I couldn’t find the answer yet.

Here is how compressible are some of the main directories on my linux box (tar gzip):
Path : uncompressed –> tar.gz compressed (real compressibility in %)
/var/log/journal : 590 MB –> 124M (79%)
So when stored on a Sandforce based SSD, these same files will take _about_ the same low amount of space?
/var/cache : 563 MB –> 560M ( 0%)
/var/lib : 56 MB –> 17M (70%)
/usr/bin : 340 MB –> 133M (60%)
/usr/lib : 1571 MB –> 658M (58%)
Or for a single app, e.g open source browser Mozilla Firefox:
/usr/lib/firefox/ : 44M –> 23M (48%)
Firefox user’s profile (with quite a few add-ons) : 38M –> 13M (66%)
So real average compressibility is always over 50% –with tar and gzip (but for the packages’ cache which isn’t used 10 hours a day anyway). Man, not bad at all!

So let says I’m looking for an SSD to make any app and daemons just load smooth and fast (and reliably ;) on the main PC I _work_ with. I’ll put only the system and users’ configuration files on the SSD (while /tmp will be in RAM, swap and data on the HDDs). If “Sandforce compression” is kind of comparable to “tar gzip compression” well, then I should run for a a Sandforce-based, synchronous memory SSD without a glitch of hesitation. And happily let the non Sandforce SSD controller like Crucial or Samsung’ for Audio/Video/Games/Windows based uses.
Or maybe Sandforce’s “compressibility” has a rather different meaning than that of standard file’s compression, then it’d be great to have it explained somehow. As without it it is very misleading the average Joe.

Another question I have –and pardon my ignorance– but how does the Sandforce controller deal with multiple parallel compression and decompression of hundred of files, in real life multi-tasking station (from writing to the logs to loading various apps’ binaries, libs and configuration files plus backup/synchronization)?

]]> By: nouog http://www.linux-mag.com/id/8510/#comment-27401 nouog Tue, 08 Nov 2011 07:08:17 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/?p=8510#comment-27401 A nice article with some very good commentary below, even the recursive commentary on the commentary was good. More please!<a href="http://www.pelletmillguide.com/wood_pellets_making_is_a_bright_business_in_austria.html" rel="nofollow">wood pellet business in Austria</a> A nice article with some very good commentary below, even the recursive commentary on the commentary was good. More please!wood pellet business in Austria

]]> By: hydorah http://www.linux-mag.com/id/8510/#comment-9475 hydorah Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:31:04 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/?p=8510#comment-9475 IOZone is a great tool, I discovered while doing a University project that involves file system performance testing - Great results easy to work with! Spread the word!!! IOZone is a great tool, I discovered while doing a University project that involves file system performance testing – Great results easy to work with!

Spread the word!!!

]]>