Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MS Researchers Call Moving Server Storage To SSDs a Bad Idea

Posted by timothy on from the professor-if-these-projections-are-accurate dept.

An anonymous reader writes "As an IT administrator did you ever think of replacing disks by SSDs? Or using SSDs as an intermediate caching layer? A recent paper by Microsoft researchers provides detailed cost/benefit analysis for several real workloads. The conclusion is that, for a range of typical enterprise workloads, using SSDs makes no sense in the short to medium future. Their price needs to decrease by 3-3000 times for them to make sense. Note that this paper has nothing to do with laptop workloads, for which SSDs probably make more sense (due to SSDs' ruggedness)."

9 of 292 comments (clear)

  1. Not every tool is right for every application?! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 5, Funny

    News at 11!

    1. Re:Not every tool is right for every application?! by VeNoM0619 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's hardly the issue... notice how they say 3-3000 times cheaper. Meaning a $3000 SSD would have to cost $1 for them to consider it... Don't you love pulling numbers of your ass?

      --
      Disclaimer: I am not god.
      We may not be created equal
      But we can be treated equal.
    2. Re:Not every tool is right for every application?! by Cormacus · · Score: 5, Funny

      I dunno about that. I'm pretty sure that if your only tool is a hammer, all of your problems start looking like nails . . . allowing the hammer to be "applied" to every application . . .

      --
      Mon chien, il n'a pas du nez. Comment scent-il? TrÃs mauvais!
  2. Re:What if... by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 5, Funny

    FAT chance.........

  3. Re:they already cost less per gig than some SAS dr by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What do you mean, an african or european ass?

  4. What it really means by HangingChad · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft researchers provides detailed cost/benefit analysis for several real workloads.

    If Microsoft researchers report that SSD's are not cost effective storage, it means that Microsoft is not getting any revenue from SSD storage. Or that they're behind on incorporating SSD's into the server stack. Or they caught blind-sided by the trend like they did with netbooks and are now scrambling to explain why they didn't see it coming. Oh, we found that wasn't cost effective, so we didn't incorporate it.

    I really miss the days Microsoft had it together. There was a time they were great to work with. Now they seem like the Three Stooges Do IT. SSD, eh? Oh, a wise guy! SMACK! Wo-wo-wo-wo!

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  5. Re:What if... by Rayeth · · Score: 5, Funny

    ext-remely unlikely.

  6. Re:they already cost less per gig than some SAS dr by Lord+Ender · · Score: 5, Funny

    They could grip it by the husk!

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  7. Re:What if... by darthdavid · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stop with the puns or you'll end up in prison with Reiser.