On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 04:34:00 +1000
Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> wrote:
I believe that would be true of quite /old/ SSD drives, but
definitely not for newer ones.
I wouldn't be so positive… until a real independent lab,
conducting real tests (especially with a high number of
small files, test curiously (much too) often absent from
"testers" sites).
The new drives are subject to write issues,
Yeah, like older ones.
but to hit that problem will take just as long as a
traditional spinning drive -- they too have limits, spinning
drives are mechanical.
May be, but most of my disks have a ≥ 10 years life (24/7) with
a very few errors (only 2 of 45 have 1 & 3 unrecoverable sectors),
so, if you can prove me SSD is as good as these, why not…
There have been very heavy torture tests on thew newer range of
SSDs and they are performing exceptionally well with mega data
being written [1], up to fairly heavy data usage levels.
All are biased ("strangely", to lower the write errors due to
multiple write repetitions on the same sectors); this is why
until a _real_ lab, with plausible tests protocols and
methodology doesn't make a test, I won't trust it more than
my first underwear :)
There is apparently a way to restore SSD drives to original
condition by super heating the layer that breaks down (due to
writes), targeting the exact spot with the right temperature
returns the SSD drive to brand new state. Not sure when this
newest generation will hit the market though. [2]
Yeah, go figure heating _some_ cells among all in a today's
chip density; not to mention that I don't see other
sites/labs/researchers saying the same thing.
On this ground too, us firms can't be trusted as they hire
and pay indelicate specialists to _get_ the result they
_want_; just as monsanto or the govts does.