Skip to main content

The buzz and fuss on SSD

With the focus on faster IOPS and lower power consuming devices, there has been a lot of interest and buzz around Solid State Drives (SSD). We explore some of the key talking points around SSD over here.

For a high level understanding perspective, most (not all) SSD’s key characteristics are :
•          Semiconductor (NAND flash, non-volatile)
•          No mechanical read/write interface, no rotating parts eliminating seek time or rotational delays
•          Electronically erasable medium
•          Random access storage

Through the various publications, there is a general consensus that the flash memory-based SSDs provide lower read/access latencies, higher read bandwidths, and minimal/negligible seek overheads.

Some of the key gains which make SSD a popular choice for column oriented database in NoSQL generation are :
“(1) SSDs scale up linearly with concurrent execution of database queries and outperform disks by up to a factor of two, 
(2) the low seek cost on SSDs makes column storage a better choice for laying out data on a variety of flash devices,”  (source : )

From various experiments, it has become obvious that SSD can help reduce computations and I/Os in MapReduce significantly. The observed advantage is significant in sort map and sort reduce phases up to a tune of 30-40% on a average. The advantage observed are primarily due to faster SSD throughput, shorter IOWait while making more RAM available for processing. SSDs are best suited for cache-unfriendly data with high access densities (IOps/GB) requiring low response times.

Typical use case of SSD deployment include ATM, Online Banking, ATM, Currency Trading, Point-of-Sale Transaction and data mining. Further from a green footprint, SSD offer an additional benefit of lower energy consumption, cooling and space requirements

However, flash memory architecture has also been criticized for “wear” (loss of charge due to isolation defects) and low performance during “mix” operation involving both read and write. There has also been a concern on high cost per GB for SSD versus HDD. However, the cost gap is fast reducing with market forces. With the concerns on enterprise adoption of SSD still a small question mark, there has been a tendency to move to a hybrid architecture involving both HDD and SSD with SSD taking the role of frontend or controller to HDD.  There have also been initiatives for Tiered storage where data centers utilize different types of storage throughout the storage infrastructure. For instance, SSD in Tier 0, FC/SAS in Tier 1, SATA in Tier 2 layers. There is a key trend on moving to SSD for use cases where read optimized database are deployed and primary use is to scan, select and fetch data. 
Over the years, SSD has made a key market presence and is expected to grow up in maturity and price point to offer a valid option to enterprise for much more storage options depending upon application architecture.


Popular articles

5 online tools in data visualization playground

While building up an analytics dashboard, one of the major decision points is regarding the type of charts and graphs that would provide better insight into the data. To avoid a lot of re-work later, it makes sense to try the various chart options during the requirement and design phase. It is probably a well known myth that existing tool options in any product can serve all the user requirements with just minor configuration changes. We all know and realize that code needs to be written to serve each customer’s individual needs. To that effect, here are 5 tools that could empower your technical and business teams to decide on visualization options during the requirement phase. Listed below are online tools for you to add data and use as playground. 1)      Many Eyes : Many Eyes is a data visualization experiment by IBM Research and the IBM Cognos software group. This tool provides option to upload data sets and create visualizations including Scatter Plot, Tree Ma

Data deduplication tactics with HDFS and MapReduce

As the amount of data continues to grow exponentially, there has been increased focus on stored data reduction methods. Data compression, single instance store and data deduplication are among the common techniques employed for stored data reduction. Deduplication often refers to elimination of redundant subfiles (also known as chunks, blocks, or extents). Unlike compression, data is not changed and eliminates storage capacity for identical data. Data deduplication offers significant advantage in terms of reduction in storage, network bandwidth and promises increased scalability. From a simplistic use case perspective, we can see application in removing duplicates in Call Detail Record (CDR) for a Telecom carrier. Similarly, we may apply the technique to optimize on network traffic carrying the same data packets. Some of the common methods for data deduplication in storage architecture include hashing, binary comparison and delta differencing. In this post, we focus o

In-memory data model with Apache Gora

Open source in-memory data model and persistence for big data framework Apache Gora™ version 0.3, was released in May 2013. The 0.3 release offers significant improvements and changes to a number of modules including a number of bug fixes. However, what may be of significant interest to the DynamoDB community will be the addition of a gora-dynamodb datastore for mapping and persisting objects to Amazon's DynamoDB . Additionally the release includes various improvements to the gora-core and gora-cassandra modules as well as a new Web Services API implementation which enables users to extend Gora to any cloud storage platform of their choice. This 2-part post provides commentary on all of the above and a whole lot more, expanding to cover where Gora fits in within the NoSQL and Big Data space, the development challenges and features which have been baked into Gora 0.3 and finally what we have on the road map for the 0.4 development drive. Introducing Apache Gora Although