4 ms·
But these are not tweaks to optimize performance - they're for reducing the number of writes to the SSD somewhat. Now that I think of it, one could indeed view
by Luyt 17y ago
But these are not tweaks to optimize performance - they're for reducing the number of writes to the SSD somewhat. Now that I think of it, one could indeed view those writes as a performance metric (better being: less writes).
- DenisM 17y agoIs it really better, or is it just a fell-good thing? What if reducing number of writes has no practical consequences at all? There is no data provided to judge either way.
- scott_s 17y agoCells in an SSD have a finite number of writes. But some brief Googling convinced me that with current drives, the number of writes a cell can take is not a concern even for heavy use.
- lanaer 17y agoWhen an SSD modifies a page, it has to erase & rewrite the entire block. SSDs try to avoid this by marking the block as “free” and writing data to an entirely different block, if one is available. The point here is that in order to write a tiny bit of data, SSDs have to write to a larger portion of the drive (usually). So reducing the # of tiny writes should lengthen the lifetime of the drive. It's theory, but the theory is sound enough to me to optimize for it if there's little or no downside to the optimizations. Edit: though, as noted elsewhere, these drives will generally last more than long enough, so the effort is probably unnecessary.