From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Willy Tarreau Subject: Re: Compact Flash Question Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 16:59:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20080508145943.GT8474@1wt.eu> References: <48215673.3060201@wpkg.org> <48216039.3070001@wpkg.org> <4821A12F.2020800@aitel.hist.no> <4821C462.2000108@free.fr> <20080508142714.GD6957@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]:4202 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760746AbYEHPD1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2008 11:03:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080508142714.GD6957@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Lennart Sorensen Cc: Bart Van Assche , St?phane ANCELOT , Helge Hafting , Tomasz Chmielewski , LKML , YSadgat1@gcte.com, linux-os@analogic.com, Alan , Linux IDE , Jeff Woods On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 10:27:14AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 06:46:25PM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > Silicon Systems CompactFlashes are the among the most reliable > > CompactFlashes I have used in embedded devices. See also > > http://www.siliconsystems.com/silicondrive/whitepapers/SSWP03-Endurance-R.pdf > > for a whitepaper that explains their wear leveling and error > > correction algorithms. Furthermore, Silicon Systems has a technology > > called SiSMART that allows to monitor by how far the CompactFlash is > > worn out, such that it can be monitored whether or not it is time to > > replace the CompactFlash. (Note: I am not affiliated in any way to > > Silicon Systems.) > > We too have switched to Silicon Systems and are very happy with them. > And even industrial temperature versions are hardly expensive. They may > cost more than you pay for a generic slow piece of junk at a retail > store, but you are getting a better card. Interestingly, we once got a bunch of those and had a lot of problems with them. Typically unbootable systems. We finally noticed that there was a real corruption problem, because 3 MD5s of the kernel in a row returned 3 different values. Our provider assured us that he never heard about that, and insisted that we try again on a new batch. We have had no trouble since. I guess we really got a bad batch. At least it was noticeable early in the deployment process (the worst ones being a few days after installation). However, we never had any problem with PQI industrial. > Len Sorensen Willy