From a technical point, yes. From a reality point it might not be best choice if it is read AND write. SSD has improved greatly, and is wonderful as a READ product, but I, personally, would not commit my SITE to READ and WRITE (if ecommerce, there will be a lot of that!).
Spinning rust is pretty quick these days as the latency is not solely related to the origination point (the server), but the access speed of the network in general and the entrance point of the user in particular.
While that revelation does kill the immediate thread, the rest of us might want to continue on best practices for local host or owned servers as regards to the use of SSD v HD for throughput. As indicated earlier, I'm leery of using SSD for main operations simply because I've had three SSDs fail in that performance requirement. Yet there is no doubt that SSD has the better spec for READ operations.
Having the server loaded in RAMDRIVE with writes to spinning rust (log files primarily) is a good balance for speed v reliability. I am interested in comments on how others have addressed this particular aspect of content delivery.
Once one embraces cloud hosting, these questions rarely apply as you get what you get and few modifications are possible.
SSD has improved tremendously in the last few years. One might say enormously, and is one expends the bucks for only the best that kind of performance is expected, but there is a finite side to write operations for SSD (measured in years of operation for the most part) that still falls short of spinning rust.
Query: is your system SSD only, or do you have HD (usually for extended storage) as well? Write your logs there as this will not impact the user experience at all.
How *I* view SSD for continual WRITE operations should be taken as a grain of salt. Many find no problems, and I'm happy for them. Just have been bit hard by three failures in recent years and that half micro-second speed advantage over a 7200rpm multi-tb drive just isn't worth it.