Prev: Recovering ownerships and permissions after migration
Next: SATA HDD >1TB
From: John Turco on 21 Apr 2008 23:50
Tim_Mac wrote:
>
> 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 :)


Hello, Tim:

Sound advice, indeed! I, myself, was only advocating caution, during
my prior responses in this thread.


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur(a)concentric.net>
From: John Turco on 21 Apr 2008 23:50
Folkert Rienstra wrote:
>
> 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?

<edited for brevity>

Hello, Folkert:

No...I'm calling >you< a troller, instead. <g>


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur(a)concentric.net>
From: Arno Wagner on 22 Apr 2008 13:05
Previously Tim_Mac <timmer3(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 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 :)

Indeed. And if you need to use flash, have a very close
look at the data of the specific product you consider.
There is still older, less durable flash on the market and
nobody published their load-leveling algorithms, so I am
distrustful of them. And the distinction between SLC and MLS
is still there, with the first being a lot more durable and
more expensive, and the second being in a lot of cheap
products.

Paging/swapping on flash is not a good idea in any
critical system, but critical systems will not use an OS
that needs it anyways. In non-critical systems, experiment
away.

Arno
From: Folkert Rienstra on 22 Apr 2008 11:22
John Turco wrote in news:480D6088.38EBF64A(a)concentric.net
> Folkert Rienstra wrote:
> > John Turco wrote in news:48080A66.F79460DA(a)concentric.net
> > > Eric Gisin wrote:
> > > > "John Turco" jtur(a)concentric.net> wrote in news:4801CA94.553D1020(a)concentric.net...
> > > > > JW wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 John Turco wrote in news: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?

> <edited for brevity>

You mean:
<make the evidence of your stupidity go away>, don't you, Turco.

>
> Hello, Folkert:
>
> No...I'm calling >you< a troller, instead. <g>

Right, it was me and just my sheer presence here that compelled
you to make your stupid statements. I can see how you feel trolled
by that and make you babble.

>
>
> Cordially,
> John Turco <jtur(a)concentric.net>

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