<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 15:59, Brett Davidson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brett@davidson.gen.nz">brett@davidson.gen.nz</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Steve Hodge wrote :<br>
<div class="im">>I assume you're talking about the limited lifecycle for >writes? It's not a problem in practice, see e.g. ><a href="http://storagesearch.com/ssdmyths-endurance.html" target="_blank">http://storagesearch.com/ssdmyths-endurance.html</a>. Microsoft >actually recommend that the Windows page file be kept on an >SSD.<br>
<br>
</div>Nah - as Hadley commented on, some (at our end of the market) are not so hot on sustained write speed.<br></blockquote><div><br>I think the db will have more of a random write profile rather than sequential. It seems that manufacturers tend to optimise for sequential access these days but even so SSDs generally work very well for databases.<br>
<br>Cheers,<br>Steve<br></div></div>