Richard L. Hamilton wrote: > > Older SSDs (before cheap and relatively high-cycle-limit flash) > were RAM cache+battery+hard disk. Surely RAM+battery+flash > is also possible; the battery only needs to keep the RAM alive long > enough to stage to the flash. That keeps the write count on the flash > down, and the speed up (RAM being faster than flash). Such a device > would of course cost more, and be less dense (given having to have > battery+charging circuits and RAM as well as flash), than a pure flash device. > But with more limited write rates needed, and no moving parts, _provided_ > it has full ECC and maybe radiation-hardened flash (if that exists), I can't > imagine why such a device couldn't be exceedingly reliable and have quite > a long lifetime (with the battery, hopefully replaceable, being more of > a limitation than the flash). >
NB. Flash is inherently radiation hard (rad-hard). There are some other, interesting SSD technologies that are also inherently rad-hard: mram, feram, pvram, etc. If you want to be a billionaire, invent the perfect SSD :-) -- richard _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
