My thoughts exactly. The article is quite inflammatory and tosses out some bold statements without really deep diving into them. My favorite:<p>&quot;Finally, the unpredictable latency of SSD-based arrays - often called all-flash arrays - is gaining mind share. The problem: if there are too many writes for an SSD to keep up with, reads have to wait for writes to complete - which can be many milliseconds. Reads taking as long as writes? That&#x27;s not the performance customers think they are buying.&quot;<p>This is completely false in a properly designed server system. Use the deadline scheduler with SSD&#x27;s so that reads aren&#x27;t starved from bulk I&#x2F;O operations. This is fairly common knowledge. Also, if you&#x27;re throwing too much I&#x2F;O load at any storage system, things are going to slow down. This should not be a surprise. SSD&#x27;s are sorta magical (Artur), but they&#x27;re not pure magic. They can&#x27;t fix everything.<p>While Facebook started out with Fusion-io, they very quickly transitioned to their own home-designed and home-grown flash storage. I&#x27;d be wary of using any of their facts or findings and applying them to <i>all</i> flash storage. In short, these things could just be Facebook problems because they decided to go build their own.<p>He also talks about the &quot;unpredictability of all flash arrays&quot; like the fault is 100% due to the flash. In my experience, it&#x27;s usually the RAID&#x2F;proprietary controller doing something unpredictable and wonky. Sometimes the drive and controller do something dumb in concert, but it&#x27;s usually the controller.<p>EDIT: It was 2-3 years ago that flash controller designers started to focus on uniform latency and performance rather than concentrating on peak performance. You can see this in the maturation of I&#x2F;O latency graphs from the various Anandtech reviews.