shop-talk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Shop-talk] OT flash drives

To: Jeff Scarbrough <fishplate@gmail.com> definitions=2020-03-14_06:, , signatures=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-2003140103
Subject: Re: [Shop-talk] OT flash drives
From: Pat Horne via Shop-talk <shop-talk@autox.team.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 14:06:22 -0500
Cc: "shop-talk@autox.team.net" <Shop-talk@autox.team.net>
Delivered-to: mharc@autox.team.net
Delivered-to: shop-talk@autox.team.net
References: <CAO8Q7CP_50PcgoKMLG6wTPmP-aJwz_VcD=69Gt7kOPw626adsA@mail.gmail.com>
--===============8801167629868406245==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


--Apple-Mail-2ECBB4C5-4D1B-4E88-922C-F202006BB190
        charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My understanding of flash drive wear out is that it=E2=80=99s not as bad as i=
t seems. While the write count is in the thousands, it takes a long time to g=
et there. The flash file system spreads the writes - even rewrites out to ev=
en out the writes on the media. Let=E2=80=99s say you have a number that you=
 increment as a counter. Each time it is rewritten it is written in a differ=
ent place, making the drives pretty robust. Another thing, when a location e=
ventually dies, the previous data is still there, just becomes read only, so=
 the data can bee retrieved.=20

Peace,
Pat

Pat Horne=20
We support Habitat for Humanity


> On Mar 14, 2020, at 1:57 PM, Jeff Scarbrough via Shop-talk <shop-talk@auto=
x.team.net> wrote:
>=20

=EF=BB=BF


> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 2:45 PM Steven Trovato via Shop-talk <shop-talk@au=
tox.team.net> wrote:
> Why is that?  At first glance, I would think that something with no=20
> moving parts would be more reliable than something with moving parts,=20
> if both are manufactured to the same standard.

Flash memory has a limited number of read-write cycles.  It's usually a larg=
e number, but the process is inherently riskier than magnetic memory (or so I=
'm told).

Modern hard drives park the heads when it's not in operation, so if the driv=
e isn't spinning, it's difficult to damage the media short of a long drop or=
 submersion.  =20
_______________________________________________

Shop-talk@autox.team.net
Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/shop-talk http://autox.team.net/archi=
ve

as@icloud.com


--Apple-Mail-2ECBB4C5-4D1B-4E88-922C-F202006BB190
        charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3D=
utf-8"></head><body dir=3D"auto">My understanding of flash drive wear out is=
 that it=E2=80=99s not as bad as it seems. While the write count is in the t=
housands, it takes a long time to get there. The flash file system spreads t=
he writes - even rewrites out to even out the writes on the media. Let=E2=80=
=99s say you have a number that you increment as a counter. Each time it is r=
ewritten it is written in a different place, making the drives pretty robust=
. Another thing, when a location eventually dies, the previous data is still=
 there, just becomes read only, so the data can bee retrieved.&nbsp;<div><br=
></div><div>Peace,</div><div>Pat<br><br><div dir=3D"ltr">Pat Horne&nbsp;<div=
>We support Habitat for Humanity</div><div><br></div></div><div dir=3D"ltr">=
<br><blockquote type=3D"cite">On Mar 14, 2020, at 1:57 PM, Jeff Scarbrough v=
ia Shop-talk &lt;shop-talk@autox.team.net&gt; wrote:<br><br></blockquote></d=
iv><div dir=3D"ltr">=EF=BB=BF<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br=
><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Sat, Ma=
r 14, 2020 at 2:45 PM Steven Trovato via Shop-talk &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:sho=
p-talk@autox.team.net">shop-talk@autox.team.net</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:=
1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Why is that?&nbsp; At first gla=
nce, I would think that something with no <br>
moving parts would be more reliable than something with moving parts, <br>
if both are manufactured to the same standard.</blockquote><div><br></div><d=
iv>Flash memory has a limited number of read-write cycles.&nbsp; It's usuall=
y a large number, but the process is inherently riskier than magnetic memory=
 (or so I'm told).</div><div><br></div><div>Modern hard drives park the head=
s when it's not in operation, so if the drive isn't spinning, it's difficult=
 to damage the media short of a long drop or submersion.&nbsp; &nbsp;</div><=
/div></div>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span></span=
><br><span>Shop-talk@autox.team.net</span><br><span>Donate: http://www.team.=
net/donate.html</span><br><span>Suggested annual donation &nbsp;$12.96</span=
><br><span>Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/shop-talk http://autox.tea=
m.net/archive</span><br><span></span><br><span>Unsubscribe/Manage: http://au=
tox.team.net/mailman/options/shop-talk/patintexas@icloud.com</span><br><span=
></span><br></div></div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail-2ECBB4C5-4D1B-4E88-922C-F202006BB190--

--===============8801167629868406245==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________

Shop-talk@autox.team.net
Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/shop-talk http://autox.team.net/archive



--===============8801167629868406245==--

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>