Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
Marco van de Voort schrieb:
I've seen 2.5" usb-only HDD's crash laptops, and my experiences with
other
arm devices (Sheeva, goflex are the same).
In short, no devices that don't have an own PSU.
My experience is quite different from yours. I've a couple of external
3.5" HHDs with external PSUs, which ceased to work a few days after
warranty expired, with a hot cabinet and inoperative HDD, all data lost :-(
The Buffalo I've got here has adequate convection slots, and provision
for a clipon fan.
In contrast none of my external 2.5" HDDs with USB power failed (so far).
I find I've got a (not very fast) laptop which will power an external
(Maxtor) 2.5", despite it not working with desktop or server computers
or with a commodity hub (I tried earlier). Comparing a USB-connected
Buffalo (with its own PSU), USB-connected/powered Maxtor, and internal
IDE drive I see hardly any difference in performance when I run my
standard "torture test", provided that in all cases the filesystems are
ext3.
If the filesystem is FAT performance is only 50%. But at the same time
at least some Flash storage is known to be optimised for FAT, and
reformatting for a different filesystem could impact its lifetime.
Trying to drag ourselves back on topic: when it comes to something
"unusual" like a MIPS-based board or time on an IBM mainframe, we've
just got to make do with what we can get. If a development board has an
IDE (PATA/SATA) interface then it's probably worth using, but in all
cases we can usefully be aware of the peculiarities of the underlying
technology: i.e. whether it risks running hot, takes a lot of current or
has constraints on its life.
--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
