[Tfug] Small-ish (capacity + size) disk alternatives

[JD Rogers]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Yan <zardus at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
>> E.g., John's mention of "685TB of data to a 40GB (drive)" as if that
>> was admirable.  Yet, that's just ~15,000 times the capacity of the
>> drive (suggesting each FLASH block is rated at ~15,000 erase cycles).
>>
>> Said another way, if you had 39GB of "executables" (i.e., data that
>> is never altered) on the drive, you might be limited to writing
>> ONLY ~15,000GB over the *life* of the drive.  An application that
>> wrote to the disk at 15MB/s would kill the drive in ~2 weeks! (!!)
>
>
> You're describing dynamic wear leveling, whereas I think pretty much any SSD
> worth its salt nowadays uses static wear leveling (see,
> http://thessdguy.com/how-controllers-maximize-ssd-life-better-wear-leveling/).
> Although for all I know, that might not apply to the smaller, cheaper ones.

Huh, well I learned something today.

>
>>
>> (similarly, assuming you could write to the *entire* media "at will",
>> you're looking at 80 weeks).
>
>
> With the price of SSDs nowadays (provided that they do support static wear
> leveling), that might not be too bad, and possibly not too much more
> expensive (and if trends continue, might even be cheaper soon).
>
> - Yan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>