Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 00:03:53 +0100 From: "James Mansion" <james@wgold.demon.co.uk> To: "Andrew Atrens" <atrens@nortel.com>, "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>, small@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: FreeBSD's embedded agenda Message-ID: <HCEPKPMCAJLDGJIBCLGHAEFIFGAA.james@wgold.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4475E99C.5000502@nortel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> It would support wear-levelling I think this might in practice be a red-herring. 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. 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).
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?HCEPKPMCAJLDGJIBCLGHAEFIFGAA.james>