Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 27th Feb 2011 20:26 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 464221
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Now, THIS is impressive
by malxau on Sun 27th Feb 2011 22:08
in reply to "RE[2]: Now, THIS is impressive"
Depends on what SSD manufacturers call a "write". If touching a block (even slightly) is a write, then a 100MB update could not be so far away from a 100kB word document, depending on block size.
In principle this is true, although it's nowhere near this extreme. NTFS needs to write to six places to create a new file - assuming a 256Kb block size, that's 1.5Mb. Note (for fair comparison) that a 100Mb (to download) update will expand into a much larger 300-400Mb set of writes to multiple files. Assuming the average file size being replaced is 2Mb, we'd have (400Mb / 2Mb) * (2Mb + 1.25Mb), or 650Mb of block writes. So the single 100Mb (to download) update is still 433 word saves.
RE[4]: Now, THIS is impressive
by Neolander on Sun 27th Feb 2011 22:16
in reply to "RE[3]: Now, THIS is impressive"
You've got a point. Thought about it after writing this comment : OS updates tend to often spread into lots of small files, so they keep a much worse effect than periodically rewriting a small file.
If your numbers about the block size are realistic, this "auto-save" feature needs some tuning before HD movie editing kills an SSD in a year, though.
Oh, well, guess I need a bit of sleep, which I'm going to take now.




Member since:
2010-03-08
Depends on what SSD manufacturers call a "write". If touching a block (even slightly) is a write, then a 100MB update could not be so far away from a 100kB word document, depending on block size.