Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 12:25:30 -1000 (HST) From: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@jroberson.net> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why is SU+J undesirable on SSDs? Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1211031224570.1947@desktop> In-Reply-To: <201211032130.PAA04484@lariat.net> References: <201211032130.PAA04484@lariat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012, Brett Glass wrote: > Have been following the thread related to SU+J, and am wondering: why is it > considered to be undesirable on SSDs (assuming that they have good wear > leveling)? I have been enabling it on systems with SSDs, hoping that between > the lack of rotating media and the journaling I would have very robust > systems. I know of no reason to support this notion. Although SSDs are so fast you might be happy to wait for the fsck time in exchange for snapshots. Jeff > > --Brett Glass > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1211031224570.1947>