Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:48:00AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: > On Wed 24 Jun 2009 at 02:32:24 PDT free...@t41t.com wrote: > > > >The lifetime and reliability of SSDs are less-than-or-equal-to the > >lifetime and reliability of spinning magnetic drives, so don't buy an SSD > >for that. Whether SSDs use less power is an open question. There's a lot > >of data going either way. The last comparison I saw suggested spinning > >drives average less power than their SSD counterparts. In any event, it's > >not clear-cut yet. SSDs probably do generate less heat (but I've not seen > >data on that). Of course, the access time on an SSD is order(s) of > >magnitude less than for a spinning drive, and that's cause enough for > >lots of people to buy one. > > SSD's are/should also be favored in devices that are prone to mechanical > shocks. E.g., tablet PC's, and handheld devices like cellphones, music > players or game players. Interesting details. I was a hardware logic major, not software, but I got shunted into software and went withthe flow. To all the comments, pro/con, it looks that my earlier projection was right. It will indeed be awhile before there are reliable solid-state devs that can replace the spinning disk. And even then, cross-backups and even having a tape backup of critical data is a must. That said, I still want to buy one of these sub-mini notebooks this summer. -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Wed 24 Jun 2009 at 02:32:24 PDT free...@t41t.com wrote: The lifetime and reliability of SSDs are less-than-or-equal-to the lifetime and reliability of spinning magnetic drives, so don't buy an SSD for that. Whether SSDs use less power is an open question. There's a lot of data going either way. The last comparison I saw suggested spinning drives average less power than their SSD counterparts. In any event, it's not clear-cut yet. SSDs probably do generate less heat (but I've not seen data on that). Of course, the access time on an SSD is order(s) of magnitude less than for a spinning drive, and that's cause enough for lots of people to buy one. SSD's are/should also be favored in devices that are prone to mechanical shocks. E.g., tablet PC's, and handheld devices like cellphones, music players or game players. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
First, be careful about statements like "10 years before it fails to hold state." Usually that means if you write data to the device and put it on a shelf, you've got 10 years before the data is unreadable. Being marketing possibly it's true if you will write it few times and no more ;) store it in perfect stable room temperature with low natural radiation background etc. for a decade? The number you probably care about is how long _in active use_ the drive will last, and that's probably _not_ 10 years. The primary 1 writes of it's size if it would be properly managed (flash filesystem). As it emulates disk divide it by at least two on writing large files, at least 20 in case of random small writes. is less noticeable. Implementing wear leveling in OS-level software isn't feasible. As I mentioned, wear leveling happens within the chip, so the OS doesn't even know a block swap has occurred. (As an extension you are wrong. flash chips doesn't do this. There is a controller that do this. If it would give simple interface to flash chips and say PCI-Express or SATA, making proper flash filesystem would be possible. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
Gary Kline: > Http://www.mydigitaldiscount.com/SPD/runcore-64gb-pata-mini-pci-e-pcie-ssd-for-asus-eee-pc-901-and-1000---backorder-runcore-64gb-pata-mini-pci-e-pcie-ssd-for-asus-eee-pc-901-and-1000--88DB-1224129741.jsp > ... statement that this device lasts ten years before it fails to > hold state. Roland Smith: > The big difference is that it is much easier to tweak and change > algorithms when doing it in software. Wojciech Puchar: > This flash chips have to emulate hard drive, which slows them down > manyfold > ... has acceptable lifetime/reliability, and uses less power/generates > less heat than traditional platter HD ... > [F]or example wear leveling and emulation small blocks requires moving > of data within flash, this lowers both performance and lifetime. I should know better, but I'm going to reply anyway. First, be careful about statements like "10 years before it fails to hold state." Usually that means if you write data to the device and put it on a shelf, you've got 10 years before the data is unreadable. Being marketing figures, these numbers are naturally stretched and inflated. Data retention is strongly dependent on ambient temperature, among other things. More to the point, that's a statistic you probably don't care about, because who's going to buy a $200+ SSD hard drive and then leave it on a shelf for a decade? The number you probably care about is how long _in active use_ the drive will last, and that's probably _not_ 10 years. The primary source of degredation (and eventually, failure) is writes, so minimizing writes will probably extend the drive's life. NAND Flash, as used in SSDs, is typically rated for (order of magnitude...) 10k write cycles. How many writes that gives you, once you put a bunch of chips together into an SSD and do wear leveling and all that, is anyone's guess. (The manufacturer probably knows, but won't tell you.) Current NAND Flash chips do ECC and wear leveling transparently. It is a significant time cost to move a block, so it's usually done when a block is already being erased. This eliminates half the time because you already know half the data trivially (it's being erased), and erase is already a long operation, so making it a little longer is less noticeable. Implementing wear leveling in OS-level software isn't feasible. As I mentioned, wear leveling happens within the chip, so the OS doesn't even know a block swap has occurred. (As an extension of this, the OS doesn't know what the write count is, per block.) The OS doesn't have access to physical parameters of the Flash cells (parameters the chip itself can measure on-the-fly) to know when a swap needs to occur. Depending on implementation, the OS may not even realize when (or how often) an ECC correction occurs. Wear leveling algorithms are anything but trivial, are usually are closely guarded trade secrets, and depend heavily on manufacturing process parameters that are themselves trade secret. (This is not to say a Flash-specific file system doesn't have value... you can probably get a lot just by caching writes as long as possible, and putting commonly-modified pieces of data near each other in the address space so they can be written together when updating is needed.) The SATA bridge does have a non-zero impact on read and write times. However, that impact is nowhere near "manyfold" the inherenet read/write time. In fact, it's pretty close to negligible. Most of the time is eaten up by multi-level cell sensing/placement, ECC correction, and as mentioned above, wear leveling (for writes). The lifetime and reliability of SSDs are less-than-or-equal-to the lifetime and reliability of spinning magnetic drives, so don't buy an SSD for that. Whether SSDs use less power is an open question. There's a lot of data going either way. The last comparison I saw suggested spinning drives average less power than their SSD counterparts. In any event, it's not clear-cut yet. SSDs probably do generate less heat (but I've not seen data on that). Of course, the access time on an SSD is order(s) of magnitude less than for a spinning drive, and that's cause enough for lots of people to buy one. And finally, wear leveling is just a fact of life with Flash. It's not a symptom of emulating a spinning drive or some particular block size. Wear leveling won't go away (and you won't gain back that part of the write time) by inventing a non-SATA, Flash-specific HD interface that nobody supports yet. In fact, Gary's link talks about a device with a PCIe interface, so the whole issue of acting like a spinning drive isn't applicable. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 03:59:44PM -0500, David Kelly wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:10:41PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > > > > battery-backed ram sound great for the time being! > > > > if not now [this minute], then relatively soon, i'm guessing > > within a few years somebody will have a solid-state device that emulates > > the current mechanical technology. it will wind up being considerably > > faster than the current drives and suck Much less juice. > > We are already there. SSDs are not slower than mechanical disk drives, > they are faster. The only detriments are 1) cost, 2) limited write life. FOUND IT: URL IS: Http://www.mydigitaldiscount.com/SPD/runcore-64gb-pata-mini-pci-e-pcie-ssd-for-asus-eee-pc-901-and-1000---backorder-runcore-64gb-pata-mini-pci-e-pcie-ssd-for-asus-eee-pc-901-and-1000--88DB-1224129741.jsp YOU were right about the cost. i thought it was half the $220. the 10k r/w cycle isn't that bad > > -- > David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net > > Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:30:25PM -0500, Gary Gatten wrote: > If it's fast enough to allow one to work unimpeded, has acceptable > lifetime/reliability, and uses less power/generates less heat than > traditional platter HD - I'd say it's a good solution. It's not a one > size fits all world. > hm. but then, the rhetorical question might be: Does any one thing fit everyone? seriously, i did check the specs sheet for this flavor of SSD. the most noteworthy thing was the statement that this device lasts ten years before it fails to hold state. the youtube video demo'd the narrator using windoze XP and editing a video, then task-switching and browsing the net. it showed some girl talking; her voice was audible. i'll post the site if i ever find it, but i gather it was from dec, '08. gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:12:05PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:59:44 -0500, David Kelly wrote: > > We are already there. SSDs are not slower than mechanical disk > > drives, they are faster. The only detriments are 1) cost, 2) limited > > write life. > > What about power consumption? Because they seem to be primarily > intended for portable devices, it should be better than "tradidional > hard disks", but as I read, it's worse (less efficient, because higher > current drain). Don't think generic generalizations can be made this early in the life of the technology. Shop for SSDs while looking at the properties that interest you. In general, reading is much faster than for mechanical HD. Also seek time is nil. And read power consumption is low. A serious contender for use in servers where lots of unchanging data is needed quickly. Probably not as good of an idea for use in a mail server, but ideal for a web server. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:10:41PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:22:19PM -0700, Kurt Buff wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 16:07, Gary Kline wrote: > > > > For a small unit like this, SSD is really nice. > > > > But, for my workstations/servers, I'm wondering if a pure > > battery-backed RAM disk, in RAID1 with a regular hard drive, might be > > the real screamer. > > battery-backed ram sound great for the time being! The downside is low capacity: 4-8 RAM modules, limiting these devices to 64GiB. And they consume more power than HDDs when idle! [http://techreport.com/articles.x/16255/11] > if not now [this minute], then relatively soon, i'm guessing > within a few years somebody will have a solid-state device that emulates > the current mechanical technology. it will wind up being considerably > faster than the current drives and suck Much less juice. Intel's X25 is already faster [http://www.intel.com/design/flash/nand/extreme/index.htm] and consumes less electricity than a HDD [http://techreport.com/articles.x/16255/11]. Of course RAM-based disks kick ass when writing files. [http://techreport.com/articles.x/16255/6] > oh yeah, and in a few years *every* computer will have a battery back up > --not just our laptops. after some N minutes everything will be saved. > much less lost data due to sudden power outtages. I don't think so. Not every part of the world suffers from regular power outages. And efficient batteries require rare raw materials like lithium, with demand far outstripping winnable reserves. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpOhDxS8Qm49.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:59:44 -0500, David Kelly wrote: > We are already there. SSDs are not slower than mechanical disk drives, > they are faster. The only detriments are 1) cost, 2) limited write life. What about power consumption? Because they seem to be primarily intended for portable devices, it should be better than "tradidional hard disks", but as I read, it's worse (less efficient, because higher current drain). -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 13:59, David Kelly wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:10:41PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote: >> >> battery-backed ram sound great for the time being! >> >> if not now [this minute], then relatively soon, i'm guessing >> within a few years somebody will have a solid-state device that >> emulates >> the current mechanical technology. it will wind up being considerably >> faster than the current drives and suck Much less juice. > > We are already there. SSDs are not slower than mechanical disk drives, > they are faster. The only detriments are 1) cost, 2) limited write life. Not completely there, AFAIK - FlashRAM write speeds are still significantly slower than standard RAM. Of course, standard RAM is significantly more expensive than FlashRAM, especially with the battery backup, but it doesn't have the limited write life. Kurt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:10:41PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > > battery-backed ram sound great for the time being! > > if not now [this minute], then relatively soon, i'm guessing > within a few years somebody will have a solid-state device that emulates > the current mechanical technology. it will wind up being considerably > faster than the current drives and suck Much less juice. We are already there. SSDs are not slower than mechanical disk drives, they are faster. The only detriments are 1) cost, 2) limited write life. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 09:46:01PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>and lifetime. > > > >Even a flash filesystem will have to do wear levelling. > > yes - but it don't have to copy blocks that are free. with disk > emulation - it doesn't know anything about filesystem and don't know > what blocks are free. If it is swapping from heavily used blocks to lightly used blocks then "so what" if there is an "unnecessary" read/write? Perhaps its harder to determine if unused than to simply move the data. I seem to recall something like this in comments in the FreeBSD virtual memory manager in 6.0-RELEASE. Don't want to leave the old data laying around for security reasons so even if the blocks are unused the formerly heavily used blocks need to be scrubbed. As I originally said to Gary Kline, "Don't let someone scare you away from the 99.8% solution waiting on the 99.9% solution." -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:22:19PM -0700, Kurt Buff wrote: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 16:07, Gary Kline wrote: > > For a small unit like this, SSD is really nice. > > But, for my workstations/servers, I'm wondering if a pure > battery-backed RAM disk, in RAID1 with a regular hard drive, might be > the real screamer. battery-backed ram sound great for the time being! if not now [this minute], then relatively soon, i'm guessing within a few years somebody will have a solid-state device that emulates the current mechanical technology. it will wind up being considerably faster than the current drives and suck Much less juice. oh yeah, and in a few years *every* computer will have a battery back up --not just our laptops. after some N minutes everything will be saved. much less lost data due to sudden power outtages. gary > > Kurt -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
and lifetime. Even a flash filesystem will have to do wear levelling. yes - but it don't have to copy blocks that are free. with disk emulation - it doesn't know anything about filesystem and don't know what blocks are free. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 16:07, Gary Kline wrote: > you guys aren't going to believe what i just found on the web for > the ASUS Eee-901 [or is it the "900"]. it was for the 9- and > 10-inch screens. i was using konq which just segv'd so i am > taking a break and thought i'd share this. > > last night, i could barely believe the ten-inch with a 40GB SSD. > these mini-notebooks take two memory chips. they just plug in. > i was googling around and found they have 32's and even 128's. > so you can get 64 or up to 256Gigs of solid state disk ... > not in a year or two (or five or six), but now. > > i'll double and triple check to make sure this isn't a sham, but > they had a thing on you-tube... Oh, and next time i see the > speech therapist, i'll lug my hugmongous thinkpad and demo what > i've done with my scripts and flite > > 8 kilobux for a Doze speech dev my butt. with berkeley unix and > open source tools, you can have it for a few hundred bux. > > gary For a small unit like this, SSD is really nice. But, for my workstations/servers, I'm wondering if a pure battery-backed RAM disk, in RAID1 with a regular hard drive, might be the real screamer. Kurt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:23:22PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> whatever. > > > > Not so. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_file_system > > > > Most flash devices sold as harddisks have hardware that emulates a > > traditional harddisk, representing it as a (P/S)ATA block device. Unless > > you can bypass this, there is no need for a special filesystem. > > yes this is exactly a problem. it emulates hard disk, which lowers > performance much. for example wear leveling and emulation small > blocks requires moving of data within flash, this lowers both performance > and lifetime. Even a flash filesystem will have to do wear levelling. And you'll have to gather writes to minimize the (slow) wiping of eraseblocks. In other words, you'll be doing more or less the same that current hardware does. But then in software, which is generally slower than dedicated hardware. The big difference is that it is much easier to tweak and change algorithms when doing it in software. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpZ3J9a7kwNL.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: you're not going to believe this.
If it's fast enough to allow one to work unimpeded, has acceptable lifetime/reliability, and uses less power/generates less heat than traditional platter HD - I'd say it's a good solution. It's not a one size fits all world. -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Wojciech Puchar Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 12:25 PM To: FreeBSD Mailing List Cc: Gary Kline Subject: Re: you're not going to believe this. > 99.8% solution waiting for the 99.9% solution. > > As for "emulating a hard drive", its only slow relative to potential it's a nonsense to pay for emulation layer that slows down real devices. And random filesystem writes could be much faster on flash than on disk - if properly designed ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
99.8% solution waiting for the 99.9% solution. As for "emulating a hard drive", its only slow relative to potential it's a nonsense to pay for emulation layer that slows down real devices. And random filesystem writes could be much faster on flash than on disk - if properly designed ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
whatever. Not so. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_file_system Most flash devices sold as harddisks have hardware that emulates a traditional harddisk, representing it as a (P/S)ATA block device. Unless you can bypass this, there is no need for a special filesystem. yes this is exactly a problem. it emulates hard disk, which lowers performance much. for example wear leveling and emulation small blocks requires moving of data within flash, this lowers both performance and lifetime. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 09:31:06AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > you guys aren't going to believe what i just found on the web for > > the ASUS Eee-901 [or is it the "900"]. it was for the 9- and > > 10-inch screens. i was using konq which just segv'd so i am > > taking a break and thought i'd share this. > > > > last night, i could barely believe the ten-inch with a 40GB SSD. > > these mini-notebooks take two memory chips. they just plug in. > > i was googling around and found they have 32's and even 128's. > > so you can get 64 or up to 256Gigs of solid state disk ... > > not in a year or two (or five or six), but now. > > today we have huge flash disks for really cheap, but still don't have > native flash filesystem in any OS, be it FreeBSD or windoze or mac os x or > whatever. Not so. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_file_system Most flash devices sold as harddisks have hardware that emulates a traditional harddisk, representing it as a (P/S)ATA block device. Unless you can bypass this, there is no need for a special filesystem. The only downside is that one has no idea how good or bad this interface hardware is. The abovementioned Wikipedia article provides insight into the unique issues surrounding flash-based filesystems. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpf0WCcyUrGg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:31:06 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar wrote: > today we have huge flash disks for really cheap, but still don't have > native flash filesystem in any OS, be it FreeBSD or windoze or mac os x or > whatever. > > This flash chips have to emulate hard drive, which slows them down > manyfold Article: "NILFS: A File System to Make SSDs Scream" http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7345/1.html -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:52:27AM -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 09:31:06AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > > today we have huge flash disks for really cheap, but still don't > > have native flash filesystem in any OS, be it FreeBSD or windoze or > > mac os x or whatever. > > > > This flash chips have to emulate hard drive, which slows them down > > manyfold > > > so is there any best guess regarding what timeframe a filesystem > for freebsd might exist? on the you-tube demo they were using > [i think] XP. Don't worry about it. Buy your SSD (Solid state Storage Device) and mount with the noatime option. Don't let someone scare you away from the 99.8% solution waiting for the 99.9% solution. As for "emulating a hard drive", its only slow relative to potential FLASH speeds. Its fast relative to hard drive speeds. Writing may not be as fast as a "real" HD, YMMV. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 09:31:06AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > you guys aren't going to believe what i just found on the web for > > the ASUS Eee-901 [or is it the "900"]. it was for the 9- and > > 10-inch screens. i was using konq which just segv'd so i am > > taking a break and thought i'd share this. > > > > last night, i could barely believe the ten-inch with a 40GB SSD. > > these mini-notebooks take two memory chips. they just plug in. > > i was googling around and found they have 32's and even 128's. > > so you can get 64 or up to 256Gigs of solid state disk ... > > not in a year or two (or five or six), but now. > > today we have huge flash disks for really cheap, but still don't have > native flash filesystem in any OS, be it FreeBSD or windoze or mac os x or > whatever. > > This flash chips have to emulate hard drive, which slows them down > manyfold so is there any best guess regarding what timeframe a filesystem for freebsd might exist? on the you-tube demo they were using [i think] XP. i'll see if i can find the site. gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
you guys aren't going to believe what i just found on the web for the ASUS Eee-901 [or is it the "900"]. it was for the 9- and 10-inch screens. i was using konq which just segv'd so i am taking a break and thought i'd share this. last night, i could barely believe the ten-inch with a 40GB SSD. these mini-notebooks take two memory chips. they just plug in. i was googling around and found they have 32's and even 128's. so you can get 64 or up to 256Gigs of solid state disk ... not in a year or two (or five or six), but now. today we have huge flash disks for really cheap, but still don't have native flash filesystem in any OS, be it FreeBSD or windoze or mac os x or whatever. This flash chips have to emulate hard drive, which slows them down manyfold ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: you're not going to believe this.
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 06:21:33PM -0500, Gary Gatten wrote: > How fast is it though? Fast enough, or will the r/w/access times make > everything slow? Not all SSD is created equal. Ah, yes, that was the key to this site, then. it said that with their newer, faster speed--i think at least double--the response time moved from a slow crawl to a walk. i use konq because it has festival as a builtin. --after a hard day, there are times when the last thing i want to do is read-with-eyes some dense, boring document or man page. solution is to mouse-swipe and have it read to me. o/wise, i'd use firefox3 like most people do. i'll post this page if i ever find it again; share the good news. > > There's a "new" SD format too - up to 2TB Prolly within a couple > years, or maybe someone will get some federal stimulus funds and > manufacture it sooner! After all, it could help us solve the "Climate > Change" issue, that's always a good way to get money > man, truer words never spoken! do you have a url with this new SSD info. this really would help save energy since there are so many hard drives spinning [[Everywhere]] just burning up the gigawatts. this could very well go-viral no stim money needed. but then i dont know, honestly, because i dont know what these guys need. but, for sure, i'm going to have a min of a 64G SSD in some notebook this year. probably this summer. :_) gary > -Original Message- > From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Gary Kline > Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 6:08 PM > To: FreeBSD Mailing List > Subject: you're not going to believe this. > > > you guys aren't going to believe what i just found on the web > for > the ASUS Eee-901 [or is it the "900"]. it was for the 9- and > 10-inch screens. i was using konq which just segv'd so i am > taking a break and thought i'd share this. > > last night, i could barely believe the ten-inch with a 40GB SSD. > these mini-notebooks take two memory chips. they just plug in. > i was googling around and found they have 32's and even 128's. > so you can get 64 or up to 256Gigs of solid state disk ... > not in a year or two (or five or six), but now. > > i'll double and triple check to make sure this isn't a sham, but > they had a thing on you-tube... Oh, and next time i see the > speech therapist, i'll lug my hugmongous thinkpad and demo what > i've done with my scripts and flite > > 8 kilobux for a Doze speech dev my butt. with berkeley unix and > open source tools, you can have it for a few hundred bux. > > gary > > > > > -- > Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service > Unix > http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org >For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php > The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > > > > > > > > "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient > and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. > If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email > and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have > received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by > return email and delete this email from your system." > > -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: you're not going to believe this.
How fast is it though? Fast enough, or will the r/w/access times make everything slow? Not all SSD is created equal. There's a "new" SD format too - up to 2TB Prolly within a couple years, or maybe someone will get some federal stimulus funds and manufacture it sooner! After all, it could help us solve the "Climate Change" issue, that's always a good way to get money -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Gary Kline Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 6:08 PM To: FreeBSD Mailing List Subject: you're not going to believe this. you guys aren't going to believe what i just found on the web for the ASUS Eee-901 [or is it the "900"]. it was for the 9- and 10-inch screens. i was using konq which just segv'd so i am taking a break and thought i'd share this. last night, i could barely believe the ten-inch with a 40GB SSD. these mini-notebooks take two memory chips. they just plug in. i was googling around and found they have 32's and even 128's. so you can get 64 or up to 256Gigs of solid state disk ... not in a year or two (or five or six), but now. i'll double and triple check to make sure this isn't a sham, but they had a thing on you-tube... Oh, and next time i see the speech therapist, i'll lug my hugmongous thinkpad and demo what i've done with my scripts and flite 8 kilobux for a Doze speech dev my butt. with berkeley unix and open source tools, you can have it for a few hundred bux. gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
you're not going to believe this.
you guys aren't going to believe what i just found on the web for the ASUS Eee-901 [or is it the "900"]. it was for the 9- and 10-inch screens. i was using konq which just segv'd so i am taking a break and thought i'd share this. last night, i could barely believe the ten-inch with a 40GB SSD. these mini-notebooks take two memory chips. they just plug in. i was googling around and found they have 32's and even 128's. so you can get 64 or up to 256Gigs of solid state disk ... not in a year or two (or five or six), but now. i'll double and triple check to make sure this isn't a sham, but they had a thing on you-tube... Oh, and next time i see the speech therapist, i'll lug my hugmongous thinkpad and demo what i've done with my scripts and flite 8 kilobux for a Doze speech dev my butt. with berkeley unix and open source tools, you can have it for a few hundred bux. gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
