Re: Btrfs/SSD

[Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>]

Roman Mamedov posted on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 23:24:19 +0500 as excerpted:

> Days are long gone since the end user had to ever think about device
> lifetimes with SSDs. Refer to endurance studies such as
> http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-
all-dead
> http://ssdendurancetest.com/
> https://3dnews.ru/938764/
> It has been demonstrated that all SSDs on the market tend to overshoot
> even their rated TBW by several times, as a result it will take any user
> literally dozens of years to wear out the flash no matter which
> filesystem or what settings used

Without reading the links...

Are you /sure/ it's /all/ ssds currently on the market?  Or are you 
thinking narrowly, those actually sold as ssds?

Because all I've read (and I admit I may not actually be current, but...) 
on for instance sd cards, certainly ssds by definition, says they're 
still very write-cycle sensitive -- very simple FTL with little FTL wear-
leveling.

And AFAIK, USB thumb drives tend to be in the middle, moderately complex 
FTL with some, somewhat simplistic, wear-leveling.

While the stuff actually marketed as SSDs, generally SATA or direct PCIE/
NVME connected, may indeed match your argument, no real end-user concern 
necessary any more as the FTLs are advanced enough that user or 
filesystem level write-cycle concerns simply aren't necessary these days.


So does that claim that write-cycle concerns simply don't apply to modern 
ssds, also apply to common thumb drives and sd cards?  Because these are 
certainly ssds both technically and by btrfs standards.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman