5 ms·
Many consumer drives tend to omit this feature (or lie about it) because all anybody looks at is size and iops. Nobody sells more consumer drives by advertising
by mtanski 10y ago
Many consumer drives tend to omit this feature (or lie about it) because all anybody looks at is size and iops. Nobody sells more consumer drives by advertising that the writeback cache on the drive respects flush commands (and barriers).
- fulafel 10y agoWhich current or recent sata/scsi drive omits or lies about cache flush commands? Leaving FUA unimplemented is fine. Bottom of barrel flash sticks probably do lie, and some IDE era PC drives did, but major disk vendors are pretty sensitive about their reputations wrt data integrity now.
- mtanski 10y agoA few years ago some of the intel SSD drives has issues with this. http://www.evanjones.ca/intel-ssd-durability.html http://www.evanjones.ca/intel-ssd-durability.html Drive was advertising FUA but it didn't actually implement it (or implemented it incorrectly). Then there were drives that were storing things in cache and reporting as written but didn't actually have capacitors to write out the data in case of power failure. http://lkcl.net/reports/ssd_analysis.html http://lkcl.net/reports/ssd_analysis.html , also the paper from FAST13. I think in 2016 the situation looks much better.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]