[mythtv-users] SSD's

Johnny jarpublic at gmail.com
Sat Oct 3 01:05:06 UTC 2009


> I was thinking about, when the price comes down a teeny bit more for
> one for fronting the the MBE storage. I;m thinking that this disk
> would be chosen for new recordings ahead of any other storage grouped
> disks provided it was most empty, which can be done in off periods,
> after an evening recordings have finished by moving the recordings to
> the other disks. The point is that during busy periods, recordings or
> comm flagging the io to the disk would cope much better than
> conventional disks as there is no delay due to seek time. Running a
> fileserver benchmark at work showed a stunning throughput compared to
> normal disk, down to no seek time. Having multiple recordings going to
> disk at the same time (say multirec) shouldn't bandwidth limited, also
> the machine OS/mysql could live on the same disk. Obviously those big
> raid volumes that some users have could be spun down more frequently.

If you are going to be moving recordings over to another disk you are
going to using double the energy and causing an extra hassle, and I
don't see any significant benefit that you wouldn't get from having a
couple of traditional drives for storage. Also I don't think that
mythtv tries to choose the most empty drive for more recordings. I
think it just tries to balance the load (ie use each drive the same
amount). So it would still record to the SSD the same amount as it
does your other drives. Even with just 2 normal drives you wouldn't
have multiple recordings on a single spindles until you get up to 3
recordings going at once. Even then most drives can easily handle 2 HD
recordings and comm-flagging without issue. So you might only really
need to worry when you got up to 5 HD recordings going at once. I
doubt that happens often if ever.


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list