Comments on: Intel Flash Storage Products for SQL Server

By: Glenn Berry

Glenn Berry — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:50:07 +0000

In reply to Lauren Buchholz. A RAM disk might be a good solution for you, for tempdb. RAM is incredibly cheap, so you might want to go larger than 4GB.

By: Lauren Buchholz

Lauren Buchholz — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 19:21:42 +0000

What are your thoughts on using a RAM disk for tempDB while using these? We are actually configuring a server with 2x of these right now and are current server hammers the tempdb pretty hard. Ram is cheap enough we can setup 4GB for a Ram disk, put tempdb on there to both not put as many write cycles on the SSD’s as well as improve overall IO.

By: Glenn Berry

Glenn Berry — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:51:42 +0000

In reply to Robert. That depends on your workload. The Intel 910 will have better sequential and random I/O performance, but it requires a PCI-E slot, and is more expensive. The Intel DC S3700 will use a SATA/SAS 6Gbps connection, and will be less expensive. It will also have less sequential and random I/O performance. The DC S3700 does better on reads than it does on writes.

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 16:15:25 +0000

Hi Glenn,

We are considering using local SSD storage for the tempdb on a new SQL 2012 cluster. Do you think either the Intel 910 or the DC S3700 would be a good choice for this?

Thanks,

Robert