71–80 of 205 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You need not just OS support but specific motherboard too. Currently AFAIK this is only supported on SuperMicro dev kits.
What's the point of making it DDR3 DIMM compatible if they require a special motherboard to plug in?
I can't wait to see the programming paradigm of memory vs permanent storage begin to blur in the next 5 or so years. It's going to make some major assumptions about how you program stuff change quite significantly and it's really exciting.
I can't wait to see the programming paradigm of memory vs permanent storage begin to blur in the next 5 or so years. It's going to make some major assumptions about how you program stuff change quite significantly and it's really exciting.
How is this different than IBM's single store model? Memory and disk are addressed as one with hardware providing the protection needed in case of component or system failure. Unless your writing at the machine level I really do not see the need for most programmers to ever concern themselves with storage, that should be the work of the underlying machine code and/or OS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HP is already working on this with what they're calling "The Machine". They're writing a new OS around the new storage technologies with the understanding that it might not make sense to separate RAM from disk pretty soon here. They've also suggested that they'll be porting versions of Linux and Android to this platform. Of course, all of this is pretty marketing heavy and not a lot of details have been released, so…
I am not sure it is even a real project. I tried to find anyone working on it and failed. Nice story though.
[1] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/06/hp-lab...
[2] http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/206401-with-the...
I don't quite understand. Does this act like a stick of memory or an SSD? Is it just using the memory controller as a super fast parallel bus? If it does act like normal memory, what happens at reboot?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it behaves like RAM, from the POV of the OS, I'd imagine the advantage to be the large size. There's also the fact that it won't lose its data on power loss. Of course, if it behaves like a regular SSD, the read speeds still exceed SATA3.0 speed.
> There's also the fact that it won't lose its data on power loss. Does this mean that for software to take full advantage of this, the software will need to be updated to account for it? For instance, Redis loads data into memory from disk upon starting, but if something like this 400GB SSD is available as memory (and say for instance, 300GB is in use by Redis), wouldn't it make sense for Redis, upon starting, to ju…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is this different than IBM's single store model? Memory and disk are addressed as one with hardware providing the protection needed in case of component or system failure. Unless your writing at the machine level I really do not see the need for most programmers to ever concern themselves with storage, that should be the work of the underlying machine code and/or OS.
if ram and permanent storage becomes the same, in instance, you wont need to "open(" a file, just to point to the memory location of it.
What would be the advantage of this comparing to PCIe/M.2 PCIe SSDs? Is it all about reduced latency, i.e. very small reads/writes would benefit?
>The benefit of using a DDR3 interface instead of SATA/SAS or PCIe is lower latency because the SSDs sit closer to the CPU. The memory interface has also been designed with parallelism in mind and can thus take greater advantage of multiple drives without sacrificing performance or latency. SanDisk claims write latency of less then five microseconds, which is lower than what even PCIe SSDs offer (e.g. Intel SSD DC P3…
I think the market for this could be much bigger if it behaved like a regular RAM DIMM, only slower and nonvolatile; it somewhat reminds me of old machines that used magnetic core RAM. This could be useful for laptops, like a zero-power suspend-to-(NV)RAM. The only thing that is worrying is the endurance of the flash - especially if it's being treated almost like RAM in this application.
I can't wait to see the programming paradigm of memory vs permanent storage begin to blur in the next 5 or so years. It's going to make some major assumptions about how you program stuff change quite significantly and it's really exciting.
The smartphones of today are already doing it?