[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian not suitable for SSD due to apt/dpkg?

On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 10:23:32AM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
> On 30/09/2012 18:49, Frank Bauer wrote:
> > Why not, my computer upgrade cycles are about 6-8 years and the
> > computer won't be idling all the time - especially considering modern
> > desktop environments running whole database engines to store
> > config/meta data.
> > 
> > Is writing of 160GB/day realistic? Hopefuly not, but see my apt
> > measurements below.
> > 
> > There is also something called SSD write amplification - the erase
> > blocks on the device are often larger than your normal filesystem
> > blocks, which might lead to up to 10x data actually writen to SSD,
> > i.e. down to 1.3years of overwrites in the extreme case.
> Have you done any actual calculation on this? A quick Google search on SSD write
> cycles shows more articles debunking this theory than supporting it.

Just a data point:

I'm on an Intel SSD (120GB) since Aug 2009 -- running Debian testing all
the time. I do not upgrade daily, but often. I have _not_ done any of
the optimizations mentioned on the wiki. I have on average approx 15GB
free on the drive. Obviously, I ran a kernel <3.2 for most of the time.
I do lots of compiling on this SSD.

So far, I have nothing to complain about and consider this drive as
fairly reliable.


Michael Hanke

Reply to: