SanDisk has dived into the client OEM flash drive jungle with its latest X100 SSD. SanDisk bought SSD controller company Pliant last year and that company's Lightning SSD products provide SanDisk with its enterprise server-class products. Now it has introduced its X100 line of client SSDs – PC, notebook and ultrabook – which do …
The reliability of SSD devices still worries me
Today, I've already had a long rave about SSD storage devices under the title of 'Intel 520 240GB SSD' and there's no point repeating all of it here.
Suffice to say, SSDs haven't proven themselves both over the long term and at high storage densities. Moreover, figures for read/rewrite operations are actually published, this was never 'matter of fact' for magnetic HDs; alone, this is of considerable concern (especially when considering long term storage).
Quoting from earlier remarks: "...it remains to be seen how they work out in practice, certainly for the moment I only use them for OSes or where backups are guaranteed and regular."
Re: The reliability of SSD devices still worries me
"""Suffice to say, SSDs haven't proven themselves both over the long term and at high storage densities."""
They might not have done so for you, but I've got hundreds of them that've been running 24/7 in enterprise workloads for the last 3 years... they're fine.
"Moreover, figures for read/rewrite operations are actually published, this was never 'matter of fact' for magnetic HDs; alone, this is of considerable concern (especially when considering long term storage)."
I think maybe you don't understand how SSDs work, and specifically how they're different from spinning magnetic storage devices. Also, manufacturer-published performance data is always worthless, on any product in any field. Test it yourself. Long term storage, which to me means "Write once and read the same data over a long period of time" is a perfect application for an SSD - they're really quite good at maintaining written data, since most of the failure modes occur on write events, not reads. A spinning disk, on the other hand, is more or less guaranteed to fail in 3-5 years of continuous runtime.
And you shouldn't have any data, on any storage device, without backups (and RAID, if space allows.) If you follow those same standard guidelines with SSDs, you still won't have data loss.
Just how do they calculate the mean time between failures?
They quote 2 million hours (about 200 years), so do they test 1000 of them for a few months and extrapolate from that? Or do they just pluck a figure out of air at random?
Paris because I'm sure she could go for 2 million hours :)
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Analysis Spam and the Byzantine Empire: How Bitcoin tech REALLY works
- VIDEO Herschel Space Observatory spots galaxies merging