News
6/12/2008
03:05 PM
George Crump
George Crump
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%
Repost This

Flash Vs. RAM Solid State Disks

As major vendors ready for entry into the solid-state disk (SSD) market with Flash memory systems, don't count out the traditional RAM SSD. Even though RAM SSDs are more expensive per capacity, companies like Texas Memory Systems are seeing continued growth in RAM-based SSD systems. Why? RAM SSDs have two advantages: speed and reliability.

As major vendors ready for entry into the solid-state disk (SSD) market with Flash memory systems, don't count out the traditional RAM SSD. Even though RAM SSDs are more expensive per capacity, companies like Texas Memory Systems are seeing continued growth in RAM-based SSD systems. Why? RAM SSDs have two advantages: speed and reliability.In the SSD market, speed is king and for customers needing to squeeze every ounce of I/O out of their systems, RAM SSD is still the only way to go. The answer is in the numbers. For comparison, a typical mechanical hard disk drive does 4- to 5-millisecond reads and writes and can sustain about 150 to 300 random I/O's per second.

The typical Flash SSD completes reads in about 200 microseconds (0.2 milliseconds) and 100,000 random read I/O's per second; very impressive when compared with disk. In read-heavy applications, you will see a significant performance increase. Writes, however, are as high as 2 milliseconds and can sustain up to 25,000 random write I/O's per second. While you will still see a performance increase on writes with some Flash SSD vs. hard disks, they're most impressive from a read-performance perspective.

RAM SSD, on the other hand, is significantly faster at both read and write operations. It performs 15-microsecond (0.015 milliseconds) reads and writes and 400,000 random I/O's per second. Significant performance improvement can be seen on both types of operations. The challenge with RAM SSD is that you are dealing with smaller capacity -- 128 GB is typical, but smaller sizes aren't uncommon. You are looking for applications that have specific files that can be moved to the SSD; redo logs, undo segments, indices, and frequently accessed tables are great examples.

Flash SSD has another write-related issue; it can only handle so many. The typical range for Flash SSD is around 1 million to 5 million write cycles. For most applications, this is many years worth of writes. Most enterprise Flash SSDs are made up of multiple Flash modules. Having multiple Flash modules is essential to delivering maximum bandwidth and high availability through RAID protection. Flash SSDs aren't a good fit for latency-sensitive, write-intensive applications; for example, accelerating redo logs, undo segments, and enterprise messaging.

For many applications, Flash SSDs will offer significant and affordable performance increases, but when you need more performance or have legitimate concerns about a high-write application, RAM SSDs are the way to go.

George Crump is founder of Storage Switzerland, an analyst firm focused on the virtualization and storage marketplaces. It provides strategic consulting and analysis to storage users, suppliers, and integrators. An industry veteran of more than 25 years, Crump has held engineering and sales positions at various IT industry manufacturers and integrators. Prior to Storage Switzerland, he was CTO at one of the nation's largest integrators.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Containing Corporate Data on Mobile Devices
Containing Corporate Data on Mobile Devices
If youíre still focused on securing endpoints, youíve got your work cut out for you. WiFi network provider iPass surveyed 1,600 mobile workers and found that the average US employee carries three devices -- a smartphone, a computer, and a tablet or e-reader -- with more than 80% of them doing work on personal devices.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2012-3946
Published: 2014-04-24
Cisco IOS before 15.3(2)S allows remote attackers to bypass interface ACL restrictions in opportunistic circumstances by sending IPv6 packets in an unspecified scenario in which expected packet drops do not occur for "a small percentage" of the packets, aka Bug ID CSCty73682.

CVE-2012-5723
Published: 2014-04-24
Cisco ASR 1000 devices with software before 3.8S, when BDI routing is enabled, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device reload) via crafted (1) broadcast or (2) multicast ICMP packets with fragmentation, aka Bug ID CSCub55948.

CVE-2013-6738
Published: 2014-04-24
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in IBM SmartCloud Analytics Log Analysis 1.1 and 1.2 before 1.2.0.0-CSI-SCALA-IF0003 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via an invalid query parameter in a response from an OAuth authorization endpoint.

CVE-2014-0188
Published: 2014-04-24
The openshift-origin-broker in Red Hat OpenShift Enterprise 2.0.5, 1.2.7, and earlier does not properly handle authentication requests from the remote-user auth plugin, which allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and impersonate arbitrary users via the X-Remote-User header in a request to...

CVE-2014-2391
Published: 2014-04-24
The password recovery service in Open-Xchange AppSuite before 7.2.2-rev20, 7.4.1 before 7.4.1-rev11, and 7.4.2 before 7.4.2-rev13 makes an improper decision about the sensitivity of a string representing a previously used but currently invalid password, which allows remote attackers to obtain potent...

Best of the Web