2 ms·
Remapping bad sectors to the end of the drive doesn't solve much. For starters, GPT actually expects the end of the drive to be usable, so we'd need to introduc
by wtallis 4y ago
Remapping bad sectors to the end of the drive doesn't solve much. For starters, GPT actually expects the end of the drive to be usable, so we'd need to introduce a new partition table format or make the drive an active participant in updating the partition table.
But more importantly, you cannot simply hand-wave away the challenges of having NAND erase blocks that are huge compared to both NAND page sizes and the allocation units used by host software. If you make a drive that is at first glance "compatible" with existing software and filesystems but behind the scenes has to do eg. 24MB read-modify-write cycles for any size of host write, the drive may be much simpler than current SSDs but will be dead within a week or two at most (and painfully slow until then).
- ChrisLomont 4y agoSSDs already do all you just listed behind the scenes. The FTL is already mapping such things behind the scenes so filesystems don't have to implement it. As the paper mentions, changes to these cycles lengthens the lifetime. The filesystem at the os level won't change.