On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:13 AM, UFS User <ufs.u...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>But everyone I know (including me) has had an SSD fail, usually with no >explanation. > >So is this just chance, or ... are CF cards really a lot more reliable than >SSD ? The following pages , and references in them , may be useful : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_drive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wear_leveling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write_amplification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Solid-state_computer_storage_media http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Solid-state_computer_storage No, these aren't useful at all, and further, the previous response that compared SSDs to spinning disks was also irrelevant. I am asking why compact flash cards (which are flash) seem to be much, much more reliable and durable than SSD (which is also flash). Why do I have CF parts running for 8+ years all over the place, but everyone I know has had SSDs fail (including me) ? There is no mention of spinning hard disks here, nor is this about *how* flash degrades in general - because in this case, they're both flash. Further, the failures I am seeing with SSDs are not because they wore out - they just quit. Comments ? _______________________________________________ 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"
