Hey Alan, On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 19:40 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > What happens, with the sync option on a VFAT file system, is that the > > FAT tables are getting pounded and over-written over and over and over > > again as each and every block/cluster is allocated while a new file is > > written out. This constant overwriting eventually wears out the first > > block or two of the flash drive. > All non-shite quality flash keys have an on media log structured file > system and will take 100,000+ writes per sector or so. They decent ones > also map out bad blocks and have spares. The "wear out the same sector" > stuff is a myth except on ultra-crap devices. That's easy enough to say but AFAICT there doesn't seem to be any easy well to tell the good from the bad from the just plain ugly. I typically don't buy junk (I didn't think), but I've definitely experienced this, first hand, with Sony Memory Vaults, SanDisk CF cards, some SimpleTech CF cards, some SmartMedia cards (what an oximoron that is), and now this 1G USB stick (which was, I admit, an "off brand" I had never heard of before at Frys Electronics). The CF cards were burned up in a PDA, so it's not just this. For a myth, I've definitely seen too much of it. Strangely (and in response to another comment someone made) some USB cards which I reformated for ext2 have survived quite well. > > I'm also going to file a couple of bug reports in bugzilla at RedHat > > but this seems to be a more fundamental problem than a RedHat specific > > problem. But, IMHO, they should never be setting that damn sync flag > > arbitrarily. > It sounds like your need to find a vendor who makes decent keys. For > that matter several vendors now offer life time guarantees with their > USB flash media. Now THAT I gotta check into. I never noticed anything on the packaging about a guarantee, but I will now. But how do you determine which are "decent" keys? They don't put stickers on them saying "this one is decent" and "this one is junk" and I'm an old cynic who has learned that price is not always a good indicator either. Maybe the guarantee will be a clue. I've just got to shop for it more. > Sync gets set by RH because it seemed the right thing to do to handle > random user device pulls. Now O_SYNC works so excessively well on > fat/vfat that needs looking at - and as you say likewise perhaps the > nature of the FAT rewriting. > However its not a media issue, its primarily a performance issue. Yeah, several of us have noticed the performance issue! > Alan Mike -- Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | [email protected] /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Sync option destroys flash!
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: Sync option destroys flash!
- References:
- Sync option destroys flash!
- From: "Michael H. Warfield" <[email protected]>
- Re: Sync option destroys flash!
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Sync option destroys flash!
- Prev by Date: Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
- Next by Date: Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
- Previous by thread: Re: Sync option destroys flash!
- Next by thread: Re: Sync option destroys flash!
- Index(es):