All I'm saying is that a normal SLC cell can handle about 10 times more writes then a MLC if everything else is the same. And as far as I ca tell, the ability to handle writes is the OPs main concern. A SLC based SDHC card will have about 10 times longer life span in that regard. If you want it perfect then sure there are better options and technologies. I'm just trying to make the choice a easy one based on what the OP asked. There is allways better cheaper and faster tech just around the corner. 27. aug. 2014 21:26 skrev "Jim Thompson" <j...@smallworks.com> følgende:
> SD cards are storage, but not “disks” nor “drives”. > > Beyond m-SATA, eMMC is your best option. Not only are they faster than SD > cards (speeds of the larger devices rival those of traditional SSDs, as > well as supporting a “TRIM”-like operation, priority interruptible READ and > ERASE operations, background operations, and riding the cost-curve of > cellular handsets (growing) .vs consumer point-and-shoot cameras > (shrinking), etc.) > > (This, by the way, is a huge, huge ‘hint’.) > (You may wish read between the lines.) > > A lot of the SLC / MLC mythos is from before the days of JEDEC standards > for endurance, advanced wear-leveling algorithms, and before a lof of the > firmware engineers understood concepts such as “read disturbance”, “write > disturbance”, and “ECC correction thresholds”. It’s certainly not as > simple as you’re making it out to be. > > (This, again, is the big reason that Netgate stayed out of the early > fracas around SSDs.) > > I’m not going to depend on what someone said in the forum over 3 years > ago, since it’s unlikely to apply today. > > Jim > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 1:32 PM, Espen Johansen <pfse...@gmail.com> wrote: > > For completeness sake. > Just to clarify. You can get SDHC cards that are SLC based. Pretty much > everything called industrial grade SD/SDHC will be a SLC SSD in SD format. > Understood. Thank you for the clarification. > > Would it be possible to have the description updated on the sales page? It > only says you can boot via SD through USB. > > -- > Ryan Coleman > ryanjc...@me.com > m. 651.373.5015 > o. 612.568.2749 > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 9:24, Jim Thompson <j...@netgate.com> wrote: > > > Yes, the system can be booted from an SD (or SDHC) card. Or from USB, or > from the m-SATA. > > All of these require proper preparation of the requisite ‘disk’ (-like > device). > > Jim > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Ryan Coleman <ryanjc...@me.com> wrote: > > I understand *that* however it doesn't say on the features page it can be > booted off the SD slot - is that true? If so I have to change a few quotes > I have in play as they will need to get mSATA SSDs instead. > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 9:20, Jim Thompson <j...@smallworks.com> wrote: > > > The SD (SDHC describes some cards which work in the slot) card slot is a > “base feature”. If people choose to fit a m-SATA drive, > then they can. Or they can use the SD card socket. > > It’s not like we’re going to de-solder the SD card socket if it’s not > going to be used. > > Neither are we going to carry two different SKUs (one with, one without). > > Jim > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 7:57 AM, Ryan Coleman <ryanjc...@me.com> wrote: > > Why not answer the question? > > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 7:56, Jim Thompson <j...@netgate.com> wrote: > > Ryan, > > Don't troll. > > > > On Aug 27, 2014, at 7:33 AM, Ryan Coleman <ryanjc...@me.com> wrote: > > Wait, so the SDHC slot on this board is simply for show? > > On Aug 26, 2014, at 13:56, Sergii Cherkashyn <ser...@accurategroup.com> > wrote: > > Thank you Espen, > > Squid is for filtering purpose only, not to save bandwidth. > On Netgate they have only this SSD as an option. But I’ll keep your advice > in mind. > > Best regards*,* > *Sergii Cherkashyn* > > > Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 20:45:46 +0200 > From: Espen Johansen <pfse...@gmail.com> > To: pfSense support and discussion <list@lists.pfsense.org> > Subject: Re: [pfSense] Netgate APU2 SSD module question > Message-ID: > < > caadq7-adzhlsv1p6rl7kwaaomaws1uqcet6fxa5ngdn8sl5...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I personally don't think you will have an issue with too many writes in a > normal environment. Why squid tho? if its for filtering fine. For > acceleration and 3-6 persons it will most likely not do you much good. > Also check MLC vs SLC. SLC based SSD will last longer. Approximately 10 > times longer. And even more with the right write leveling tech. > > Just my 2 cents. > > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list >
_______________________________________________ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
