Am Samstag, 6. Februar 2016, 16:41:59 CET schrieb Aleksandar Atanasov: > You have to determine where exactly is speed required with your files. > As it was already mentioned (twice) speed is required only for certain > things. Putting a video file that is opened once every couple of days is > most certainly not crutial to the system's performance. I haven't heard > anyone ever suggesting that you store your video collection on an SSD... I still store larger files like audio files on SSD as well. Why? Laptop is so much more silent with only SSD equipped. That said, I believe that if you buy a good SSD they are not less reliable than harddisk. The Intel SSD 320 is more than 4 years old and according to smart data still considers it self to be new (smartctl -a excerpt): ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 233 Media_Wearout_Indicator 0x0032 098 098 000 Old_age Always - 0 Also the mSATA SSD still seems fine: 173 Wear_Leveling_Count 0x0032 092 092 000 Old_age Always - 267 202 Percent_Lifetime_Used 0x0031 092 092 000 Pre-fail Offline - 8 Granted, chips can fail. But a harddisk also has chips that can fail. And mechanics that can fail. Anyway, I had very good experiences with harddisk as well as SSDs so far. In my private use I have not one harddisk or SSD hardware failure with data loss in the last ten years. I suggest tough that you really take the time to read reviews and if in doubt rather go for the more reliable device. I did with Intel SSD 320 and then later with Crucial m500. The Crucial device is said to be a bit slower in reviews I found, but more reliable than other brands like Samsung at that time. Its some years since that already, and I didn´t do any research recently. So don´t take my findings for current state. Another suggestion: Many laptops can hold two SSDs. I do have Intel SSD 320 300 GB SATA SSD + Crucial M500 480 GB mSATA in the same ThinkPad T520. And the most critical data in my home directory is on BTRFS RAID 1. So first I can scrub checksums and second I can repair the BTRFS if only one SSD returns crap. I had some checksums errors with Crucial M500 SSD once with I attribute to a sudden power loss. The Intel SSD 320 does have condensators that should allow the SSD to still write out all the data in case of power loss, but I didn´t see any place where Crucial engineers could have fitted condensators on the really tiny mSATA SSD. BTRFS scrubbing repaired this just fine, there were no SMART errors and it never happened again, so… I left it at that assumption. That said only critical stuff like OS and /home is on BTRFS RAID 1 filesystems. The music collection and photo collection I update more rarely is only on the bigger Crucial mSATA SSD. The photo import directory is on RAID 1 again as I backup photos from SD card more often than I actually sort them into Digikam. So in any case if you want to be on the safe side with SSDs I suggest you use two of them. I´d also still leave some space of them unused if possible, although others think current SSDs have enough spare area, I still think that will extend lifetime and long time performance of SSDs due to the way SSDs work internally. Thanks, -- Martin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.