David Woodhouse wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > >>Flash based IDE drives sounds good. >> > >Sounds good in theory. In practice, we can drive flash far more reliably in >software than the manufacturers of this stuff can manage to implement in >their built-in firmware. > Yea, we found that the life time of DOM is much less than DoC. Probably this is why M-Systems are so "proud" of their NFTL technology.
> >And if you think about the fact that you'll effectively have a journalling >file system on top of another journalling file system, it doesn't really >sound that good in theory either. Stick a journalling file system on a CF >card and each write will hit the flash twice - great for device lifetime, >that. Not that it matters too much - I'm led to believe that most CF >devices don't actually do wear levelling internally anyway. > From the short life time of those DOM I don't think they have ANY wear leveling mechanism. Ollie
