List:Falcon Storage Engine« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Jim Starkey Date:December 9 2008 6:23pm
Subject:Re: Memory, Falcon, and $$$
View as plain text  
Philip Stoev wrote:
> Hello.
> I totally understand your argument, however you are buying bulk 
> generic memory. You also bought whitebox machines when you bought the 
> servers themselves for less than $2000 each. Unfortunately the 
> economics is a bit different in the corporate world. People still have 
> very expensive 80gig SCSI RAID arrays out there.
Nope.  The servers (case and motherboards) are Supermicro 

who also peddle machines to the likes of EBay and Yahoo.  Chris's 
machine, an Intel supplied prototype, was also a Supermicro machine.
> The cheapest Xeon server Sun sells retails for $3,435.28 with 4 GB of 
> memory, about twice as much as a simularily-configured whitebox 
> server. The next 8GB of memory costs USD $600 (six hundred united 
> states currency).
And if Sun could find more customers to pay $600 for commodity memory 
available on the open market for $84, Sun stock price would be a great 
deal higher.

There's a name for companies that believe customers will a lot extra for 
private labeled commodities:  Extinct.

> I totally agree that we should not make any sacrifices in order to 
> have Falcon perform well in 32Mb. However, I am not sure if any of 
> those outcomes are acceptable:
> * Refusing to execute a query that Innodb would execute and error with 
> an out-of-memory condition;
> * Experience a performance degradation worse than one that would 
> happen due to OS trashing;
> * Crash or unable to recover;
Mostly, I agree.  If InnoDB cheats with an "implicit" commit, that's a 
different story.

Falcon is an engine designed for "modern on-line applications".  It 
shouldn't sacrifice on-line performance to handle batch operations that 
$50 worth of memory would fix.  I would be happy to trade-off mass 
update performance for on-line performance any day -- on-line means 
there's a human waiting.  We need to batch operations, of course, but we 
don't need to lose sleep over their relative performance.
> Philip Stoev
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Starkey" <jstarkey@stripped>
> To: "FalconDev" <falcon@stripped>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 7:09 PM
> Subject: Memory, Falcon, and $$$
>> I took delivery of 40 GB of ECC memory for my cloud.  Excluding tax, 
>> the total cost was $420 plus tax, or $10.50 per GB (shipping was free).
>> This is a question that everyone should ask himself or herself 
>> regularly: Would our users be willing to spend an extra $50 per 
>> server for a faster database?  How can we use memory better to 
>> improve performance.  And, does it make sense to sacrifice adequate 
>> memory performance to work in low memory situations?
>> -- 
>> Jim Starkey
>> President, NimbusDB, Inc.
>> 978 526-1376
>> -- 
>> Falcon Storage Engine Mailing List
>> For list archives:
>> To unsubscribe:

Jim Starkey
President, NimbusDB, Inc.
978 526-1376

Memory, Falcon, and $$$Jim Starkey9 Dec
  • Re: Memory, Falcon, and $$$Philip Stoev9 Dec
    • Re: Memory, Falcon, and $$$Jim Starkey9 Dec