> On Oct 30, 2014, at 3:39 PM, Dave Warren <da...@hireahit.com> wrote: > > On 2014-10-30 13:06, Jeppe Øland wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Jim Thompson<j...@smallworks.com> wrote: >>>> >>On the other hand, I tend to distrust manufacturers that shipped >>>> >>completely unreliable drives without any thought. >>>> >>Kingston/OCZ/Crucial are all in this boat for me. >>> > >>> >I’m sure I’ve been burned at least as badly by these, and others, and I >>> >still buy from them. >> What can you do? > > Buy quality instead of junk? I've been burned by OCZ and Crucial for sure > (including silent write failures!), although I'm not sure I've ever had a > Kingston. > > http://techreport.com/review/26058/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-data-retention-after-600tb > > tl;dr: Buy Intel, or very specific Samsung SSDs. For non-endurance testing, > you'll have better reliability out of a modern, quality SSD than rotational > drives, both on a per-drive and per-GB basis.
We’ve already shown that specific Samsung SSDs are flawed. Others have already pointed out that not all “Intel” SSDs are created equal. We’re using Kingston eMMCs on the coming netgate hardware. We ship *specific* Intel SSDs (purchased in volume) for those systems sold with an SSD in the pfSense Store. >> The speed increase from SSDs in a PC means its almost >> impossible to go back to an HDD. >> And in a firewall/appliance, the benefits from no moving parts/lower >> power/heat/noise is hard to ignore. > > There are use cases for rotational drives, primarily where $/GB is a factor > and performance isn't, but I tend toward small SSDs over rotational drives > unless there is a strong use-case for bulk storage. I really can't imagine > using a workstation without a SSD as primary storage though, I just don't > have the patience. > > Even a cheapo 30GB/60GB/whatever SSD is more than enough for pfSense and > makes a far more reliable solution than external flash. I strongly disagree. SSDs have to be part of a system, especially in an embedded environment. The debacle with the “cheap 30GB” m-sata drive from PC Engines earlier in the year (they had to take them all back) should amply demonstrate why thinking such as what you express here is deeply flawed. I’m getting a bit tired of the “shove a bunch of components together; expect it to work; complain about pfSense when it doesn’t” approach shown by some in the community. You can do what you wish, of course. You don’t *have* to be solutions from pfSense, but pfSense solutions are “best of breed” (given certain constraints). We definitely don’t buy “cheapo xx/yy/whatever SSDs”. The big reason for this is that the consequences for “you” (the royal you) being wrong are a few hundred dollars. The consequences for us being wrong can run to hundreds of thousands of dollars (or higher). “Oh crap, my SSD failed” takes on a whole new meaning when you realize that there are thousands more in the world that are about to suffer the same fate, and you offered a warranty. The “use case” for rotational drives is still present for high-write environments. (I was just discussing this with a customer at lunch today.) Jim _______________________________________________ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
