Re: 4.2 and compactflash
On Wednesday 26 September 2007 21:17:00 Chris Kuethe wrote: > On 9/26/07, Chris Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Question is: do I still need to mount / ro on current cf cards or do they > > have enough write cycles? > > Go ahead and mount rw. I've put a couple of terabytes through a 256M > card with iogen, and it's doing fine. The wear-leveling mechanisms on > the cards work quite well, and I've had cards in production for years > with no ill effect. > Thanks you Chris ;) and the guys who replied off-list. -- Greetings Chris
Re: 4.2 and compactflash
On 9/26/07, Chris Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Question is: do I still need to mount / ro on current cf cards or do they have > enough write cycles? Go ahead and mount rw. I've put a couple of terabytes through a 256M card with iogen, and it's doing fine. The wear-leveling mechanisms on the cards work quite well, and I've had cards in production for years with no ill effect. CK -- GDB has a 'break' feature; why doesn't it have 'fix' too?
4.2 and compactflash
Hi, maybe this is a bit off-topic, but: I'm planning to upgrade my firewall box which is running 4.1-STABLE on a 512Mb Kingston compactflash card to 4.2 on a 1-2gb (also Kingston) cf card. Currently I have / mounted ro and /var and /etc on an mfs which can be tricky... Question is: do I still need to mount / ro on current cf cards or do they have enough write cycles? The box doesn't run anything but pf, named and ntpd. -- Thanks Chris
