Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422641AbWCUSVF (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:21:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1422640AbWCUSVE (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:21:04 -0500 Received: from smtp.uaf.edu ([137.229.34.30]:54026 "EHLO smtp.uaf.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422641AbWCUSVB (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:21:01 -0500 From: Joshua Kugler Organization: UAF Center for Distance Education - IT To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Lifetime of flash memory Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:20:53 -0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 Cc: John Richard Moser References: <44203179.3090606@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <44203179.3090606@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603210920.53549.joshua.kugler@uaf.edu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1992 Lines: 40 On Tuesday 21 March 2006 08:01, John Richard Moser wrote: > I have a kind of dumb question. I keep hearing that "USB Flash Memory" > or "Compact Flash Cards" and family have "a limited number of writes" > and will eventually wear out. Recommendations like "DO NOT PUT A SWAP > FILE ON USB MEMORY" have come out of this. In fact, quoting > Documentation/laptop-mode.txt: > > * If you're worried about your data, you might want to consider using > a USB memory stick or something like that as a "working area". (Be > aware though that flash memory can only handle a limited number of > writes, and overuse may wear out your memory stick pretty quickly. > Do _not_ use journalling filesystems on flash memory sticks.) > > The question I have is, is this really significant? I have heard quoted > that flash memory typically handles something like 3x10^18 writes; and > that compact flash cards, USB drives, SD cards, and family typically > have integrated control chipsets that include wear-leveling algorithms > (built-in flash like in an iPaq does not; hence jffs2). Should we > really care that in about 95 billion years the thing will wear out > (assuming we write its entire capacity once a second)? > > I call FUD. Search for a thread on LKML having to do with enabling "sync" on removable media, especially VFAT media. If you are copying a large file, and the FAT on the device is being updated with every block, you can literally fry your device in a matter of minutes, because the FAT is always in the same spot, thus it is always overwriting the same spot. j----- k----- -- Joshua Kugler PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/ CDE System Administrator ID 0xDB26D7CE http://distance.uaf.edu/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/