Eugen Leitl wrote:
I was thinking a real 2.5 SSD would have a MTBF comparable to a
real hard drive (SanDisk claims 2 Mh MTBF, can't find any such
for Hama SSD, which is a bargain at about 100 EUR for 4 GByte,
which probably already answers my question).
I think that proper ssd units designed
Paul M wrote:
Eugen Leitl wrote:
I was thinking a real 2.5 SSD would have a MTBF comparable to a
real hard drive (SanDisk claims 2 Mh MTBF, can't find any such
for Hama SSD, which is a bargain at about 100 EUR for 4 GByte,
which probably already answers my question).
I think that
unsubscribe
2007/8/28, Curtis LaMasters [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Honestly I don't know the answer to your questions but keep this in mind,
pfSense loads from disk/flash/cd and then run's completely from RAM.
Curtis
On 8/28/07, Eugen Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone running a pfSense full
Honestly I don't know the answer to your questions but keep this in mind,
pfSense loads from disk/flash/cd and then run's completely from RAM.
Curtis
On 8/28/07, Eugen Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone running a pfSense full installation on a 4 GByte SSD drive?
Does it a) work b) well?
Curtis LaMasters wrote:
Honestly I don't know the answer to your questions but keep this in
mind, pfSense loads from disk/flash/cd and then run's completely from RAM.
I think this is true only for the embedded version.
The full version (with packages et.al.) will quite probably use disk I/O.
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 05:18:24PM +0200, Rainer Duffner wrote:
I think this is true only for the embedded version.
The full version (with packages et.al.) will quite probably use disk I/O.
Yes; IIRC a vanilla CF would be toast after about half a year.
I've thought about using a 4 GB
