flash drives have limited writes?

[Red Squirrel]

I was doing some research to see how I can format my USB stick to NTFS as I was unable to do it, even in linux (I could have sworn linux had a mkfs.ntfs command).

Found this:

http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewth...2004/04/05/108205.aspx

Is this true, or is this based on older technology (considering the date of that post)? I just paid 70 bucks for a 32GB usb stick with the intention of using it for regular backups as well as regular storage of big data (disk images). If it has limited writes, then that may not be a good way to use it.

I know SSHDs have this problem but I figured that's because they use a slightly different flash technology or something. Hopefully thats something they'll be able to fix, as I don't see myself ditching out money on one knowing it has limited writes. If I was to buy one it would be for a server or something with very high read/write rate.

 

[dbarton]

I think basically bacause you remove USB sticks a lot, that NTFS isn't a good choice.
I did a NTFS stick and lost all my data. I think it was because I did not "safely remove".

 

[Red Squirrel]

Yeah was reading up on that. Only issue is FAT32 is limited to 2GB files which really sucks for trying to store acronis images and what not. Guess it's best to stick to documents and smaller files. A crap load of them.

 

[AnnonUSA]

All flash media has a limited write cycle. Even Intel's new SSD's are rated for a five year lifespan. At which point the media canl begin to fail

 

[Red Squirrel]

Hmm that's not good at all for what I planned on using mine for. So guess I should treat flash media more like rewritable CDs then? Keep everything on the hard drive, and only write to the flash when really needed? Like a monthly backup or something?

 

[Nothinman]

I was doing some research to see how I can format my USB stick to NTFS as I was unable to do it, even in linux (I could have sworn linux had a mkfs.ntfs command).

As long as you have the proper package installed it does, in Debian the package is called ntfsprogs.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Does ntfs have more complex structure as far as read/writes go? After hearing that usb sticks have limited writes, is it a bad idea to go ntfs?

 

[Nothinman]

Does ntfs have more complex structure as far as read/writes go? After hearing that usb sticks have limited writes, is it a bad idea to go ntfs?

Probably. The MFT has more information in it and it's a journaled filesystem so there's more information written per-write.

 

[SunSamurai]

A new filesystem you say? One that takes all devices into account and extracts the preformance advantages in each you ponder?

MS is too busy making another bloated OS with an ugly UI for anything useful like that. But oh wait! Cleartype. =D ?

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: AnnonUSA
All flash media has a limited write cycle. Even Intel's new SSD's are rated for a five year lifespan. At which point the media canl begin to fail

it doesn't fail like a regular drive though. It will simply refuse to write. giving you a write failed error. All existing data is still there and accessible.

All flash has limited writes.the difference between SSD and USB flash is merely the controller, the memory chips are the same.

NTFS does post some risks, especially, as a journaling file system, it writes a lot more than is necessary.

the next thing on fat would be exFat, to replace FAT32 on external devices.

 

[taltamir]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: AnnonUSA
All flash media has a limited write cycle. Even Intel's new SSD's are rated for a five year lifespan. At which point the media canl begin to fail

Yeah, 5 years at 100GB per day which the average user will never reach in TWENTY years.

 

[imported_wired247]

Originally posted by: taltamir
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

taltamir - when I installed an SSD onto my laptop, I originally wanted to format it ExFAT (and I think I did format it as such) but when I installed windows 7, it basically formatted it back to NTFS anyway (IIRC).

I'm not what you'd call concerned. Should I care at all? I thought NTFS is not optimal for SSD. Still happy with the performance though.

 

[Colt45]

I think even the cheapest flash is good for 100k writes these days, afaik.

So if you overwrite a file once every minute for two years straight, you'll hit the limit. But they usually have some built in wear-levelling as well.
Apart from using it as swap, or similar purpose where the disk is getting hit incessantly, there shouldn't be an issue.

But yeah, NTFS is ugly for flash.

The linux program, btw, is 'mkntfs'. http://linux.die.net/man/8/mkntfs

 

[Modelworks]

One other tip.
When you format a flash drive , it does not delete the information. Even if you full format it the information is still there and can be recovered easily.
The only way to erase a flash drive is to overwrite the information , either with new data filling it up or with a program to write all zero.
Just a note for people that that like to share flash drives with friends/family.

 

[tcsenter]

All flash media has a limited write cycle.

All everything has limited everything, if you think about it. Even death and taxes must end sometime, we aren't going to be around forever as a species and neither is the current universe. Eventually, the universe will start to contract again, everything will get compacted together until it reaches an unfathomable critical mass and then - Big Bang # n+1.

Though it seriously bothers me when I look at those deep space images capturing thousands upon thousands of galaxies and it is for certain that I'll never know what the hell is really out there. It will be at least a couple hundred years before we have the capability for any meaningful space exploration, and another couple hundred years before we get out far enough to potentially find anything. Its just not fair!

OK, I went a little off-topic there. I'll try harder next time.

 

[taltamir]

1. when flash drives reach the limit they do NOT fail. they can still be READ millions of times (per cell), they just can't be WRITTEN to anymore... at which point you replace them.
2. the limit is rediculously high. 100,000 writes on an 80GB drive means you need to write 80 x 100,000 =8 million GB (8 petabytes) of data to reach the end of the drive's life.
160GB drive needs 16 petabytes, and so on.
3. SLC have 10 time the write limit of MLC.
4. There is some inefficiency in writes giving what is called write amplification. According to intel theirs is 1.1x while the worst on the market is 20-40x... so at 40x write wasting that means you divide the result by 40... However, 40 is for very old controllers (and very SMALL amounts of space... things like USB pen drives). realistically a modern 80GB drive (not intel) should be at WORST 10x write amplification, so 800TB is still a lot of data to write before you run out of drive. This btw makes the SSD the most robust part in the computer, monitors are rated for typically under 50k hours, cpus for about 3 years, and so on. Your car, too, will not do infinite milage, it is understood that many years in the future it will stop working... but an SSD will stop working long LONG after a SPINDLE drive fails... and when a spindle drive fails your data is lost, when an SSD fails the data is accessable (it becomes read only).
5. If you have not touched an SSD block for 10 years it will lose its data..

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: wired247

Originally posted by: taltamir
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

taltamir - when I installed an SSD onto my laptop, I originally wanted to format it ExFAT (and I think I did format it as such) but when I installed windows 7, it basically formatted it back to NTFS anyway (IIRC).

I'm not what you'd call concerned. Should I care at all? I thought NTFS is not optimal for SSD. Still happy with the performance though.

it should be fine... just a bit slower than it would be with exfat, and more stuttering...
you will HAVE to reformat again anyways when the final version of windows 7 comes anyways, maybe that time it will allow you to have the OS drive as exFAT, heck the beta IS to get feedback, tell MS that they should consider pushing or even FORCING the use of exFAT on an SSD drive used to run windows7.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: AnnonUSA
All flash media has a limited write cycle. Even Intel's new SSD's are rated for a five year lifespan. At which point the media canl begin to fail

Yeah, 5 years at 100GB per day which the average user will never reach in TWENTY years.

But all AT members are SuperMegaPower Users! :sun: SMPU
We can cripple even the most robust hardware in a matter of weeks.

Originally posted by: RedSquirrel
So guess I should treat flash media more like rewritable CDs then?

In some respects SSD's are exactly like CD-RW media.

 

[Onceler]

withdrawn

 

[Blain]

* He didn't say drive size was limited to 2GB.
* NTFS vs FAT