BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- Subject: [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 11:47:53 -0400
- In-reply-to: <5367AE30.5020205@borg.org>
- References: <5364F3FB.40707@blu.org> <5367AE30.5020205@borg.org>
Kent Borg wrote: > - Flash can die with no warning and no recourse. Any medium can fail with no warning. Good backups have always been the go-to recourse for these occurrences. > - Flash hates writes. Yep. Like I described earlier in the thread. > extra is sitting mostly blank. I think wear-leveling happens across the > whole device, all of the sectors I can refrain writing to are a benefit. Most SSD controllers will move data in the background so that wear leveling really is leveled across the entire array of flash cells. I suggest looking at EnhanceIO. It works a lot like Intel's SRT, using the SSD as a cache for slower block devices. You'll get the flash read performance benefits without the worries about flash wear. Sure, the cache drive will fail but that failure won't damage your data. -- Rich P.
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- From: kentborg at borg.org (Kent Borg)
- [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- From: mbr at arlsoft.com (MBR)
- [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- References:
- [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- From: gaf at blu.org (Jerry Feldman)
- [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- From: kentborg at borg.org (Kent Borg)
- [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- Next by Date: [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- Next by thread: [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- Index(es):