3 ms·

I've had far fewer (read: zero) issue with the dozen or so SSDs I've personally had over the past decade or so. The same is not true for hard drives. Having no

by TylerE 4y ago

I've had far fewer (read: zero) issue with the dozen or so SSDs I've personally had over the past decade or so. The same is not true for hard drives. Having no moving parts really eliminates a lot of failure modes.

Brian_K_White 4y ago
hdd's can mechanically fail, but so can everything, and so it's a no-op. Sdd's can electrically fail or fail silicon burn-in or have firmware time bomb bugs. But hdd do not flip random bits to dissipation by merely sitting on the shelf unpowered, which despite your extensive one person decade or so experience does happen. They also don't lose/flip bits from being read many times but never rewritten, and they don't suffer mechanical or electrical wear from sitting unpowered on the shelf. sdd's are fine, the problem is only that they are marketed as a replacement for hdd's, and so they are used as replacements for hdd's, instead of as 'medium-term non-volatile ram'
- TylerE 4y ago
  > hdd's can mechanically fail, but so can everything, and so it's a no-op. What? That's not logical. That's like saying the chance to win any bet, no matter how long the odds, are 50/50, you either win or you lose.
  - Brian_K_White 4y ago
    Incorrect. It's like saying what it did say, which is that that everything fails, and if one thing has one failure mode, some other thing just has some other failure mode. The fact that an ssd has much less chance of suffering a mechanical problem is not an important fact, since the problem is loss of data, not the particular mechanism of loss of data. An ssd certainly loses less data, in the short term, in a laptop. And then when you remove that ssd or store that laptop, as little as 5 years later you can have flipped bits, which is a thing that absolutely does not happen with a decommissioned hdd from a desktop. The same goes for use in a nas where a given file may get written once and then never re-written but possibly read multiple times, and neighboring cells read multiple times. Over time the ssd loses bits, the hdd does not. The advantages of an ssd are just a local maxima.
    - TylerE 4y ago
      > An ssd certainly loses less data, in the short term, in a laptop. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You haven't provided even ordinary evidence.
      - Brian_K_White 4y ago
        I haven't made any extraordinary claims.
        TylerE 4y ago
        I give up. I literally quoted the claim at you.
        Brian_K_White 4y ago
        If you think that it's an extraordinary claim that an ssd loses less data than an hdd in the short term in a laptop application, you should indeed give up.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- wtallis 4y ago
  > But hdd do not flip random bits to dissipation by merely sitting on the shelf unpowered, Yeah, they do. Maybe not as often as a mostly worn-out SSD, but it's not unheard-of. > They also don't lose/flip bits from being read many times but never rewritten, Whoever told you about NAND read disturb errors must have done you a disservice by not communicating how hard they are to trigger and how easy they are to recover from. If you are letting this worry influence your purchasing decisions, you're wildly overestimating the scope of this issue. Unless you have some previously unheard-of real workload that is effectively Rowhammer for SSDs.

by TylerE 4y ago

Brian_K_White 4y ago

hdd's can mechanically fail, but so can everything, and so it's a no-op. Sdd's can electrically fail or fail silicon burn-in or have firmware time bomb bugs. But hdd do not flip random bits to dissipation by merely sitting on the shelf unpowered, which despite your extensive one person decade or so experience does happen. They also don't lose/flip bits from being read many times but never rewritten, and they don't suffer mechanical or electrical wear from sitting unpowered on the shelf. sdd's are fine, the problem is only that they are marketed as a replacement for hdd's, and so they are used as replacements for hdd's, instead of as 'medium-term non-volatile ram'

TylerE 4y ago
> hdd's can mechanically fail, but so can everything, and so it's a no-op. What? That's not logical. That's like saying the chance to win any bet, no matter how long the odds, are 50/50, you either win or you lose.
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  Incorrect. It's like saying what it did say, which is that that everything fails, and if one thing has one failure mode, some other thing just has some other failure mode. The fact that an ssd has much less chance of suffering a mechanical problem is not an important fact, since the problem is loss of data, not the particular mechanism of loss of data. An ssd certainly loses less data, in the short term, in a laptop. And then when you remove that ssd or store that laptop, as little as 5 years later you can have flipped bits, which is a thing that absolutely does not happen with a decommissioned hdd from a desktop. The same goes for use in a nas where a given file may get written once and then never re-written but possibly read multiple times, and neighboring cells read multiple times. Over time the ssd loses bits, the hdd does not. The advantages of an ssd are just a local maxima.
  - TylerE 4y ago
    > An ssd certainly loses less data, in the short term, in a laptop. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You haven't provided even ordinary evidence.
    - Brian_K_White 4y ago
      I haven't made any extraordinary claims.
      - TylerE 4y ago
        I give up. I literally quoted the claim at you.
        Brian_K_White 4y ago
        If you think that it's an extraordinary claim that an ssd loses less data than an hdd in the short term in a laptop application, you should indeed give up.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
wtallis 4y ago
> But hdd do not flip random bits to dissipation by merely sitting on the shelf unpowered, Yeah, they do. Maybe not as often as a mostly worn-out SSD, but it's not unheard-of. > They also don't lose/flip bits from being read many times but never rewritten, Whoever told you about NAND read disturb errors must have done you a disservice by not communicating how hard they are to trigger and how easy they are to recover from. If you are letting this worry influence your purchasing decisions, you're wildly overestimating the scope of this issue. Unless you have some previously unheard-of real workload that is effectively Rowhammer for SSDs.