Prev: Recovering ownerships and permissions after migration
Next: SATA HDD >1TB
From: Eric Gisin on 18 Apr 2008 11:20
"JW" <none(a)dev.null> wrote in message news:1gbh04ddmiifecps7j04c9t8ut30q1k7pr(a)4ax.com...
> On 18 Apr 2008 12:09:39 GMT Arno Wagner <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in Message
> id: <66rhc3F2lh7s3U1(a)mid.individual.net>:
>
>>Previously JW <none(a)dev.null> wrote:
>>> On 18 Apr 2008 04:29:00 GMT Arno Wagner <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in Message
>>> id: <66qmccF2jc12hU1(a)mid.individual.net>:
>>
>>>>No flash can do 2'000'000 writes per cell.
>>
>>
>>> http://ec.transcendusa.com/product/ItemDetail.asp?ItemID=TS8GCF45I-D
>>> "Endurance: 2,000,000 Program/Erase cycles"
>>
>>I stated "per cell". They state nothing, so likely "per device"
>>as manufacturers tend to pick the biggest number.
>
> I dunno, I'm figuring that they mean the entire device. But I could be
> wrong.

Which implies you could kill the drive in a few hours of writing.

Millions of people use flash drive for TEMP, browser cache, pagefile, ready-boost.
You would expect many reports of them failing if writing too much was a problem.
It would take about a month for my IE cache to reach 1GB, or 2M blocks.
The directory entries and index.dat are frequently rewritten.
From: Arno Wagner on 18 Apr 2008 11:59
Previously JW <none(a)dev.null> wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2008 12:09:39 GMT Arno Wagner <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in Message
> id: <66rhc3F2lh7s3U1(a)mid.individual.net>:

>>Previously JW <none(a)dev.null> wrote:
>>> On 18 Apr 2008 04:29:00 GMT Arno Wagner <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in Message
>>> id: <66qmccF2jc12hU1(a)mid.individual.net>:
>>
>>>>No flash can do 2'000'000 writes per cell.
>>
>>
>>> http://ec.transcendusa.com/product/ItemDetail.asp?ItemID=TS8GCF45I-D
>>> "Endurance: 2,000,000 Program/Erase cycles"
>>
>>I stated "per cell". They state nothing, so likely "per device"
>>as manufacturers tend to pick the biggest number.

> I dunno, I'm figuring that they mean the entire device. But I could be
> wrong.

Well, same here. Basically it is unclear what the number means.

Arno
From: Tim_Mac on 18 Apr 2008 13:36
fact is... flash memory has been used successfully for a long time
before it's current mainstream introduction. but it is new to a lot
of people who don't trust it, which is also understandable. if you
are a skeptic, then wait another 5 years until you're comfortable with
it. in the meantime, let the early adopters prove you right or wrong,
either way they're doing you a favour :)
From: Folkert Rienstra on 18 Apr 2008 15:41
John Turco wrote in news:48080A66.F79460DA(a)concentric.net
> Eric Gisin wrote:
> > "John Turco" jtur(a)concentric.net> wrote in message news:4801CA94.553D1020(a)concentric.net...
> > > JW wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 06:10:58 -0500 John Turco jtur(a)concentric.net wrote in Message id: <47FF4742.D30883(a)concentric.net>:
> > > >
> > > > > I followed the link you've provided, above...still, I'd be concerned
> > > > > about flash memory's relatively limited number of rewrite cycles
> > > > > (approximately 100,000, typically), if I were you.
> > > >
> > > > Some industrial flash is good for 2 million writes. Combine that with
> > > > wear leveling this is not as bad as you might think. We've shipped over
> > > > a thousand XP embedded systems on CF in the last few years, and I've
> > > > yet to see a drive wear out.
> > >
> > > Oh, I was already aware of "wear leveling," but, didn't know about that "2
> > > million writes" stuff.
> > >
> > If you knew about wear leveling all along, why do continue to post
> > your paranoid claim about flash memory "wearing out"?
>
>
> Hello, Eric:
>
> No "paranoia" involved, wise guy. <g> Besides, if the Windows "page file"
> is enabled, even 2,000,000 write cycles will be used up, pretty quickly --

You call JW a liar, Turco?

> wear leveling, or not.

Well, there's the stupidity in that statement.
It's either 2,000,000 write cycles *with* or *without* wear leveling. If
without then obviously that's of no concern _unless_ the whole drive is used
for pagefile and all the 8GB is *actually used*, begin to end, cancelling out
wear leveling. That's a hell of a lot of paging.

>
>
> Cordially,
> John Turco <jtur(a)concentric.net>
From: Folkert Rienstra on 18 Apr 2008 15:41
Arno Wagner wrote in news:66ruq5F2ll2asU1(a)mid.individual.net
> Previously JW <none(a)dev.null> wrote:
> > On 18 Apr 2008 12:09:39 GMT Arno Wagner me(a)privacy.net> wrote in Messageid: 66rhc3F2lh7s3U1(a)mid.individual.net:
> > > Previously JW <none(a)dev.null> wrote:
> > > > On 18 Apr 2008 04:29:00 GMT Arno Wagner me(a)privacy.net> wrote in Messageid: <66qmccF2jc12hU1(a)mid.individual.net>:
> > >
> > > > > No flash can do 2'000'000 writes per cell.
> > >
> > > > http://ec.transcendusa.com/product/ItemDetail.asp?ItemID=TS8GCF45I-D
> > > > "Endurance: 2,000,000 Program/Erase cycles"
> > >
> > > I stated "per cell". They state nothing, so likely "per device"
> > > as manufacturers tend to pick the biggest number.

In which case this number would actually be awfully low.

>
> > I dunno, I'm figuring that they mean the entire device. But I could be
> > wrong.

> Well, same here. Basically it is unclear what the number means.

And obviously it is far to difficult to compare them whith other ca-
pacities within the same product range and get a clue, right babblebot.

>
> Arno
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Recovering ownerships and permissions after migration
Next: SATA HDD >1TB