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 15:09:12 -0400
- In-reply-to: <5367DEF1.7030206@arlsoft.com>
- References: <5364F3FB.40707@blu.org> <5367AE30.5020205@borg.org> <5367B2A9.3090804@gmail.com> <5367DEF1.7030206@arlsoft.com>
MBR wrote: > While it's true that any medium can fail with no warning, if your data's > on a spinning magnetic platter, the most likely modes of failure do not > destroy all the data on the platter. Head crash. Opening up a crashed drive is quite the mess. Reading data from "dead" flash chips is very real, and very possible. The real difficulty is that the ATA trim command eventually erases blocks that could otherwise be used to recover data from damaged chips. That said, if the device is disconnected from power after failure and before trim can execute then the controller can be replaced with one that won't honor trim commands and will permit recovery of data. -- Rich P.
- 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
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] SSD drives vs. Mechanical drives
- From: mbr at arlsoft.com (MBR)
- [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):