From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 30 21:42:43 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3967106564A for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:42:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chris@arnold.se) Received: from mailstore.infotropic.com (mailstore.infotropic.com [213.136.34.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9B4E8FC18 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:42:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chris@arnold.se) Received: (qmail 96681 invoked by uid 89); 30 Mar 2008 21:15:58 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.2.0 ppid: 96676, pid: 96678, t: 0.1362s scanners: attach: 1.2.0 clamav: 0.90/m:42 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.123.123?) (chris@arnold.se@212.71.168.45) by mailstore.infotropic.com with ESMTPA; 30 Mar 2008 21:15:57 -0000 Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:15:57 +0200 (CEST) From: Christopher Arnold X-X-Sender: chris@localhost To: arch@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20080330231544.A96475@localhost> X-message-flag: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Outlook_isn=B4t_compliant_with_current_standards?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_please_install_another_mail_client!?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Subject: Re: Flash disks and FFS layout heuristics X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:42:43 -0000 On Sun, 30 Mar 2008, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <200803302100.m2UL0FTd015654@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon > w > rites: > >> Er, why don't you explain it again, because I can't find the reference. > > You'll find it if you search for it. > I belive phk means that ggogling for "Flash Adaptation Layer" turns up some results. > And no, I really don't want to discuss it any further with you. > But please continue the duscussion for the sake of the silent majority, there are loads of us out here who are interested in flash fs development. Also, i had the impression that newer flash based hardrives had internal logig to spread out writs evenly over the disk and to remap worn out blocks. And that the result of these algoritms increased MTBF to atleast the MTBF for spinning disks. Or have i misread something? /Chris -- http://www.arnold.se/ http://www.infotropic.com/