<p>SSD all the way.</p>
<p>The reason for this is simple: a stake pool needs to be able to perform creating a block fast. That's it. Storing and replicating data is of little concern since its a public blockchain-it can always be re-synced. I realize you wouldn't want to wait for a node to sync from scratch if you spin up a new one, but there's other ways to speed that up. Also, there should be nothing sensitive (e.g., cold keys and spending keys) or critical (e.g., the only copy of your run script). In short, a node doesn't host critical data, it makes blocks.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-12T15:53:09.303Z
2021-06-12T15:53:09.303Z
nalyd88
<p>There are multiple factors that I would consider important here:</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Cost</strong>: What's the difference in cost? If one is significantly less expensive, this can be a big factor if you're an SPO.</li>
<li><strong>Ability to replicate</strong>: You should have a backup of all important keys somewhere else. So if you delete the VM or the disk, it should be no problem to create a new node and restore your keys from the backup. Creating a new node can take some time though, so replicating a disk might be useful. However, this could also be solved by using containerization (e.g. Docker).</li>
<li><strong>Speed</strong>: The case where you delete a VM and then want to use the same disk on a new VM is probably quite rare, so this would speak for the attached SSD. Besides that, an SSD is definitely faster than a persistent disk but you'd have to test if you run into problems with the persistent disk speed.</li>
</ol>
<p>In the end it comes down to your preference, both options work.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-10T05:27:55.710Z
2021-06-11T07:00:53.453Z
2021-06-11T07:00:53.453Z
eddex
<p>You should run some tests to check throughput for both of them.</p>
<p>However, from my experience of running a Monero node I can tell you that persistent storage generated <strong>a lot of problems</strong> with responsiveness and overall uptime. Switching to SSD removed most of them. And keep in mind that Monero is a PoW coin with 2 minute block time. There are no time-critical operations even close to Cardano's getting a slot or missing it.</p>
<p>I'd say definitely SSD, but do your tests to be sure.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-12T02:05:33.543Z
Do you mean attached SSD or persistence storage SSD? I wonder if it matters which cloud provider is used. I heard anecdotally that google cloud compute was much faster than digital ocean for storage access.
Michaelb1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-11T00:43:11.463Z
2021-06-11T00:43:11.463Z
emesik
<p>I'm comparing various cloud server providers and I'm trying to understand the best storage options to run a stake pool in the cloud.</p>
<p>Is a persistent disk better than an attached SSD? A persistent disk can be replicated across zones and the data on it can be saved when the VM is deleted. I assume it has higher latency.
The locally attached SSD is obviously faster but it is deleted if the VM is deleted.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-09T20:54:32.170Z
Might help to expand VPS in the text or remove it from the title.  It's not a common abbreviation.
gRebel
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-10T22:32:49.953Z
Apparently I haven’t been around long enough to edit my own questions. Lol.
Michaelb1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-06-11T05:07:58.163Z
The members with more reputation get prompted to edit first posts and a number of other categories.  Welcome aboard, I hope I did your intent justice.  There are not too many places you get free proof-readers and editors.   :-)
gRebel
<stake-pool>
What's better for cloud Virtual Private Server stake pool operations, persistent disk or local ssd?
# What's better for cloud Virtual Private Server stake pool operations, persistent disk or local ssd?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-06-09)

I'm comparing various cloud server providers and I'm trying to understand the best storage options to run a stake pool in the cloud.

Is a persistent disk better than an attached SSD? A persistent disk can be replicated across zones and the data on it can be saved when the VM is deleted. I assume it has higher latency.
The locally attached SSD is obviously faster but it is deleted if the VM is deleted.

**Tags:** stake-pool
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Might help to expand VPS in the text or remove it from the title.  It's not a common abbreviation.  
> **username_0**: Apparently I haven’t been around long enough to edit my own questions. Lol.  
> **username_1**: The members with more reputation get prompted to edit first posts and a number of other categories.  Welcome aboard, I hope I did your intent justice.  There are not too many places you get free proof-readers and editors.   :-)  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2021-06-11. Score: 4

You should run some tests to check throughput for both of them.

However, from my experience of running a Monero node I can tell you that persistent storage generated **a lot of problems** with responsiveness and overall uptime. Switching to SSD removed most of them. And keep in mind that Monero is a PoW coin with 2 minute block time. There are no time-critical operations even close to Cardano's getting a slot or missing it.

I'd say definitely SSD, but do your tests to be sure.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Do you mean attached SSD or persistence storage SSD? I wonder if it matters which cloud provider is used. I heard anecdotally that google cloud compute was much faster than digital ocean for storage access.  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2021-06-12. Score: 2

SSD all the way.

The reason for this is simple: a stake pool needs to be able to perform creating a block fast. That's it. Storing and replicating data is of little concern since its a public blockchain-it can always be re-synced. I realize you wouldn't want to wait for a node to sync from scratch if you spin up a new one, but there's other ways to speed that up. Also, there should be nothing sensitive (e.g., cold keys and spending keys) or critical (e.g., the only copy of your run script). In short, a node doesn't host critical data, it makes blocks.


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2021-06-10. Score: 2

There are multiple factors that I would consider important here:

1. **Cost**: What's the difference in cost? If one is significantly less expensive, this can be a big factor if you're an SPO.
2. **Ability to replicate**: You should have a backup of all important keys somewhere else. So if you delete the VM or the disk, it should be no problem to create a new node and restore your keys from the backup. Creating a new node can take some time though, so replicating a disk might be useful. However, this could also be solved by using containerization (e.g. Docker).
3. **Speed**: The case where you delete a VM and then want to use the same disk on a new VM is probably quite rare, so this would speak for the attached SSD. Besides that, an SSD is definitely faster than a persistent disk but you'd have to test if you run into problems with the persistent disk speed.

In the end it comes down to your preference, both options work.


---

