Re: usb-stick durch Benutzung zerstört?
Markus Schulz <msc@antzsystem.de> wrote:
> ich kann mir übrigens beim besten Wissen nicht vorstellen, warum ein
> sync Schreibzugriff mehr auf dem Stick "rumschreiben" sollte als ein
> async?
http://readlist.com/lists/vger.kernel.org/linux-kernel/22/111748.html
Zitat:
,----
| What happens, with the sync option on a VFAT file system, is that the
| FAT tables are getting pounded and over-written over and over and over
| again as each and every block/cluster is allocated while a new file is
| written out. This constant overwriting eventually wears out the first
| block or two of the flash drive.
`----
Und weiter:
,----
| I had lost a couple of flash keys previously, without realizing what
| was going on, but what send me off investigating this was when I
| copied a 700 Meg file to a brand new 1G USB 2.0 flash memory key in a
| USB 2.0 slot. It took over a half an hour to copy to the drive, which
| really had me wondering WTF was wrong! Then, when I went to use the
| key, I found the first couple of blocks were totally destroyed. Read
| errors immediately upon insertion.
`----
,----
| Copying that 700 Meg file resulted in thousands upon thousands upon
| thousands of writes to the FAT table and backup FAT table. It simply
| blew through all the rewrites for those blocks and burned them up.
`----
S°
--
Sven Hartge -- professioneller Unix-Geek
Meine Gedanken im Netz: http://sven.formvision.de/blog/
Reply to: