"Most SSD are reliable, the only problem is they are failing in a way that is tough to detect leading to consequences we may ignore. (falsely positive functioni

"Most SSD are reliable, the only problem is they are failing in a way that is tough to detect leading to consequences we may ignore. (falsely positive functioning SSD in operations and we may experience silent corruptions)" These SSDs are not failing for physical reasons, which is the model we have in our minds for HDD failure. They are failing for logical reasons. In the near term, I think there is a very simple way to protect against this and that is to mix models. At any given time, you can buy the very latest Intel SSD and also the one-model-ago Intel SSD on Amazon. They're both fantastic and wonderfully performant and their sizes are typically identical. So, for instance, when we make a boot mirror out of SSDs, we buy one of each and make our mirror with those two. Now we know that if there is some silent, insidious, bizarro firmware bug that makes the drive brick or causes it to burn itself out early, it can't affect them both identically (which is important, since they have identical workloads, since they are mirrors). This isn't as useful on a large array since there are not 12 or 15 reliable manufacturers to mix between - but in a large array, you aren't giving each drive an identical workload like you are with a mirror. I'll bet a lot of SSD usage is confined to boot mirrors, so I think this is a decent practice that a lot of people can adopt.