On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:39:41 -0500 (EST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Doug Franklin mused: > > I'd be surprised if the criteria were _that_ stringent. NVRAM commonly > > has a lifetime of a million writes to each location. And they're > > _very_ conservative on that rating. I've personally written code that > > wrote to the same location in an NVRAM module more than 3.5 billion > > times successfully, on a device with a design lifetime of a million > > writes. I'm not saying it was the right thing to do, but it was done, > > nonetheless. > > Hmm. Seems to have got a lot better (not surprising, considering > the increase in CF technology). Last time I looked, some of the > stuff was only rated for 8K writes or so; 32K was uncommon. Power > requirements went up with write cycles, too.
Well, now, I don't know that the devices we used were in any way related to the devices that get used in, for example, cameras. We were building a product that was 1/4 U sized with a PowerPC, 32 MB of DRAM, and a generous power budget. In the much more constrained environment of a DSLR, much less capable devices might be used due to considerations like power consumption. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
