Backups are usually supposed to be done on a different storage device than the one that is actively used. I wouldn't include the "backup scenario" here unless Jos is doing backups of a storage device onto the storage device itself (if that is the case I would strongly recommend NOT to do that).
As for the quality of SSDs - yes, it has improved greatly (example for some test of longevity: http://techreport.com/review/27436/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-two-freaking-petabytes). I have read however that SSDs are much more susceptible to power failure compared to HDDs leading to a higher data corruption in case a poor electrical grid is used to power the device up. However in terms of protecting your data from shocks (dropping the notebook onto the floor) SSDs are definitely much better. Because of the mechanics that are involved in HDDs, such drives are less suitable for the task of storing data on mobile devices. Needless to say both HDDs and SSDs are not meant for long term storage. That is way things like tape drives are still produced and widely popular among people who work with servers (in terms of longevity, capacity etc. tape storage blows both HDDs and SSDs away by a lot but the main issue there is definitely the steep price for the device that are used to read those). My suggestion, Jos, is to start looking at various tech reports with tests and detailed description of the scenarios those tests were performed for so that you can decide for yourself what to do. I'm backing up my data on a regular basis to an external drive (even have a tape drive here somewhere but there seems to be some problem with it (or with Linux using it :D)) and if it wasn't for the fact that my Vaio is more than 6 years old and has a SATA2 (yes...TWO) I would have changed my HDD for an SSD long ago. If your notebook is mostly stationary (as a desktop replacement) you can go with a SSD (for regularly used files) + HDD (for less regularly used files) combo. SSDs are relatively new but I do believe they will replace the HDDs in the near future because - let's face it - in terms of innovation the HDD-departament isn't doing that much except increasing the storage density which will also stop at one point. Regards, Alex On 02/06/2016 11:00 PM, Tom Dial wrote: > Doing regular backups takes pretty good care of device failure. > Depending on how it is done, it also can help recover from accidents > other than equipment failure, like deleting files in error. > > That said, I have read that for some time SSD reliability has been at > least on a par with HDDs. And you also do not want to have to recover > data from a failed HDD. > > Tom > > On 02/06/2016 07:00 AM, Jos Collin wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I have Debian/testing installed completely in my 120GB SSD. I have >> learned that if an SSD fails, it is difficult to recover data from them. >> An SSD often does not give much warning before it fails. >> Electronic components don’t begin to grind or buzz as they grow older. >> They work – and then they don’t. >> >> So do I have to consider this risk and move the /home and /root >> directories to an HDD as they contain the Personal Data of each user, >> and only keep the Operating System files in the SSD ? How do you people >> keep the /home and /root directories, when you install the OS in an SSD >> ? (I have an Ultrabay Caddy, in which I can connect the HDD also in my >> Thinkpad T61). >> >> Please advice. >> >> Thanks, >> Jos Collin >> >> >
0x05076853.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
