On May 25, 2006, at 1:03 PM, James Mansion wrote: >> It would support wear-levelling > > I think this might in practice be a red-herring. If you're assuming CF, possibly. If you're assuming a lower level flash interface, no. > If you could convince the system to set aside an amount > of RAM for dirty disk buffers and to write them all when > its filled or on application demand (and in a way that > preseves integrity like soft updates) so that for any > given flush each sector is written at most once, then > you can run for years for most CF cards and most practical > usage patterns that don't really demand a hard disk. embedded systems are constrained in memory size, too. > Assume you have cron drive a flush once an hour and > consider how long until a sector dies, even if the drive > itself does no wear levelling at all (and I believe some > do it internally). internal wear-leveling CF: yes otherwise: not typically. Might want to re-think your argument in terms of a system with 32MB of ram and 4MB of NAND or NOR flash.Received on Fri May 26 2006 - 00:32:51 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:56 UTC