msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca writes: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015, David Kastrup wrote: >> The real SSD killer is putting swap there and/or suspend to disk. >> That's gigabytes of actually happening writes. > > Is that really true of suspend-to-disk? Seems to me that writing the > contents of memory to disk on suspend would only happen between one and > ten times per day, and with hundreds of thousands of writes available > before an SSD wears out, it has decades of lifespan at that rate. > Something else in the system will almost certainly die first. Almost an > ideal scenario for an SSD.
The ideal scenario for an SSD is server duty for anything but active and/or private file systems. Almost exclusively reads, and random access patterns. > Putting swap on SSD is another story entirely. Well, on GNU/Linux it's not quite another story since hibernation needs an active swap partition. One tries to make it as much a different story as possible by fiddling with settings like "swappiness". -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
