{have had Many SSD die} But the spinner still spins.
Nopants wrote to Lodinsetki <=-
Re: To shuck or not to shuck.
By: Lodinsetki to Digital Man on Fri Jan 19 2024 08:38 am
{have had Many SSD die} But the spinner still spins.
I've had really good luck with SSDs. The one I killed was holding
virtual machines, so likely very high i/o. But, it did take awhile.
SSDs I have used for storage have been good to me. Like you say, it depends on the use case.
SSDs are great for OS drives but any use scenario with heavy I/O operations will eventually hit the write/rewrite limit on SSD cells. In my work environment OS drives are SSDs and storage drives are spinning drives.
SSDs are great for OS drives but any use scenario with heavy I/O operations will eventually hit the write/rewrite limit on SSD cells. my work environment OS drives are SSDs and storage drives are spinnin drives.
Doesn't an OS write to its drive quite a lot? I thought modern OSes typically write quite a bit in log files, swap files (if necessary),
etc.. I would have thought an OS drive would get more I/O usage than a drive used for storage.
Nightfox wrote to Weatherman <=-
Re: To shuck or not to shuck.
By: Weatherman to Nopants on Sat Jan 27 2024 02:14 am
SSDs are great for OS drives but any use scenario with heavy I/O operations will eventually hit the write/rewrite limit on SSD cells. In my work environment OS drives are SSDs and storage drives are spinning drives.
Doesn't an OS write to its drive quite a lot? I thought modern OSes typically write quite a bit in log files, swap files (if necessary),
etc.. I would have thought an OS drive would get more I/O usage than a drive used for storage.
Nightfox
Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
---|---|
Location: | Prospect, CT |
Users: | 333 |
Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
Uptime: | 16:19:21 |
Calls: | 574 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Messages: | 235853 |