SSD hosting or HDD Hosting?

SSD can be faster and a bit more reliable however If I am not mistaken they tend to go out a bit faster than hdd's There is also a considerable cost difference as a customer If you want to spend pennies for ssd services, you should look elsewhere you will get less space for either the same or a higher price than the standard hdd. Thanks Sean
 
It depends on what you're doing and who your market is. You can fairly inexpensively create huge RAID arrays with HDDs if you don't require fast IO. SSDs technology is obviously the future though. Prices continue to drop and capacity continues to increase. Samsung is continuously pushing the envelope in this regard.
 
A solid state drive (SSD) is composed of electronic components that are based entirely on semiconductors. Since any moving parts are not available in SSD, it offers significantly reduced risk of mechanical failures. SSD provides higher sequential as well as random data read/write rates and for this reason solid state drive perform better than hard disk drives.

HDD takes around 5,000 to 10,000 μs to access the data and SSD takes around 35 to 100 μs to access the data hence it is nearly 100x faster.
 
Advantages with SSD Hosting

  • Reduced access time. The memory access time is much shorter than the access time for magnetic or optical media. Other means of solid storage may have different characteristics depending on the hardware and software used;
  • Elimination of electro-mechanical moving parts, reducing vibration, making them completely silent;
  • Why not have moving parts, are much more resistant than ordinary hard drives physical shock, which is extremely important when it comes to laptops;
  • Lower weight compared to even the most conventional portable hard drives;
  • Reduced energy consumption;
  • Possibility to work in higher temperatures than ordinary hard drives - about 70 ° C;
  • Bandwidth much higher than the other band devices, with up to 250 MB / s in write 2 and up to 700 MB / s in read operations.

These are the basic advantages that we get with SSD Hosting.
 
There is no doubt that SSD is a better option but this increases your overall budget. The other option is, you can use SSD with SAS/SATA drive. Like you can install main OS on SSD or you can use SSD for disk caching. This will reduce your cost compare to all SSD drives on the server.
 
Depending on the client requirements and website handling capacity, you should go for SSD or HDD, mine is SSD and it is working superb with no problems at all . I m completely satisfied with the speed. It is little costly and at the end of the day, your website giving fruitful results, what else you need
 
For shared/reseller hosting nodes, as well as VPS nodes that we manage and provision customers onto we have shifted over to SSD drives. We use to build the servers with 15K RPM SAS drives, but the prices between the 15K RPM SAS drives and SSD drives are almost the same so it's a no-brainer to go with SSD. (We still have some nodes running 15K RPM SAS drives and they will get changed out in a few months).

As for equipment that customers rent (dedicated servers), it all depends on what the customer wants and can afford. We offer either the choice between WDC RE SATA hard disks or SSD drives. Due to the cost of 15K RPM SAS drives we don't offer them on this product line as they would just sit instock and money spent to buy them would just go to waste.
 
If a client had a chance of smaller space on an SSD, or more on an HDD for the same price, you'd be surprised at how many would actually choose SSD. If you want a better host in general SSD is the way to go, no doubt.

If you don't need the best of the best, then an HDD will do perfectly fine for you. Generally if I'm using another host, I will go with HDD. For most occasions, you really don't need a lot of space. You don't really need 50GB of space on a VPS unless you're going to be doing daily backups etc. For most needs a smaller size SSD server would be beneficial.
 
Has anybody tried SSD caching SATA drives? NetApp calles it FlashCache, EMC calls it F.A.S.T. It seems to me that this makes for the best of both worlds. Read cache with SSD gives you the performance and the SATA drives in the back end give you the capacity.
 
And|newHOST.ro said:
Which one is best? actually there is no right or wrong answer. It depends on your needs. The HDD is the traditional hard drive that stores date on platers. The SSD stores data on microchips. Sice the SSD has no moving parts it provides a high transfer speed. the downsize is that they are more expensive. Therefore, if you are looking for somenthing cheaper with a lot of disk space, go for a HDD hosting plan. If you are looking for high performance and the higher cost is not really a problem, then you should go for a SSD hosting plan.
Click to expand...

As you mentioned it depends on the needs, SSD is better and everyone wants SSD disks
 
SSD is more costlier than the HDD but SSD is reliable, flexible & gives a high performance compared to HDD. So SSD Hosting is most prefered Nowadays...
 
Let's explain why SSD are better than HDD:

Solid State Drives (SSD) are shock resistant up to 1500g/0.5ms. Hard Drives consist of various moving parts making them susceptible to shock and damage. So, SSD is more durable than HDD.

SSD can have 100 times greater performance, quicker boot ups and faster file transfers than HDD. So, SSD is faster than HDD.

SSD use significantly less power -> less than 2W (HDD: 6W). So, SSD consume less power than HDD.

Remember: SSD is cost efficient because one SSD delivers the performance of 100 hard drives (though it has a higher price per gigabyte than HDD).

I recommend you to use SSD drive. We are using SSD for shared and VPS for more than a year and it's really good.
 
I know we've answered higher up, but a lot of this comes down to how many VPSs you put on a node, and how memory constrained VPSs are.

Even modern OpenVZ machines (assuming Linux here) use almost all available memory for caching (This is the same for Xen and KVM as they run a "real" linux kernel), so if there your VPSs are packed in, or running very lean like LEB machines they perform like poo! (technical term)

If you have RAID 10 disks and fewer larger memory VPSs, where disk caching is more likely to work, this becomes less of a problem.
 
SSD cached (small SSD + large SATA) using FlashCache is a very viable option for those who dont want to buy larger SSD disks and it delivers a lot better than plain SATA.

Probably by next year or two, alternate technology named bcache is likely to be recommended choice. No wonder as it got accepted in Linux kernel upstream already.
 
Probably by next year or two, alternate technology named bcache is likely to be recommended choice. No wonder as it got accepted in Linux kernel upstream already.
Click to expand...

ZFS already has this functionality baked-in. You can cache with SSD as well as put your log files onto some other drives (SAS or whatever). I took a look at bcache and I'm not sure what functionality it offers that can't already be done through stable technology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Supporters

Back
Top