Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo testing and ssd
On Fri, Jul 13 2012, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: Am Freitag, 13. Juli 2012, 13:42:47 schrieb Allan Gottlieb: I will be getting a new laptop with ssd (250GB). I currently run ~amd64 and wonder if this is too much writing for the flash. I have adapted to and now enjoy gnome3. If I were forced to run stable to limit compiles I would still use package.accept_keywords to permit gnome3. Any experiences with testing and ssd? thanks, allan one ssd for / one ssd for /home [[ snip ]] testing, kde, + kde-testing overlay but: /var and PORTDIR not on ssd. seriously, intel had once some calculations that even with lots of daily writes you could go on for years as long as you did not fill up the ssd completely. I will be sure to keep some empty space. thanks, allan
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo testing and ssd
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: SNIP testing, kde, + kde-testing overlay but: /var and PORTDIR not on ssd. So you have these on a HDD? /var for large write count reasons and PORTDIR for size reasons? Thanks, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo testing and ssd
Am Samstag, 14. Juli 2012, 13:28:32 schrieb Mark Knecht: On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: SNIP testing, kde, + kde-testing overlay but: /var and PORTDIR not on ssd. So you have these on a HDD? /var for large write count reasons and PORTDIR for size reasons? mostly because 64 gb is not so much ;) But sparing the ssd a lot of writes is an additional bonus. and not on one hdd but 3... a raid5. -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo testing and ssd
Am 2012-07-13 19:42, schrieb Allan Gottlieb: I will be getting a new laptop with ssd (250GB). I currently run ~amd64 and wonder if this is too much writing for the flash. I have adapted to and now enjoy gnome3. If I were forced to run stable to limit compiles I would still use package.accept_keywords to permit gnome3. Any experiences with testing and ssd? No problems with ~amd64 and gnome3 on SSD in my ThinkPad, for maybe 2yrs already. My main workstation was migrated back to a shiny new SSD yesterday, the first SSD there was flaky ... (used one, cheap from the net, no warranty ...) Stefan
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo testing and ssd
On Fri, Jul 13 2012, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: Am 2012-07-13 19:42, schrieb Allan Gottlieb: I will be getting a new laptop with ssd (250GB). I currently run ~amd64 and wonder if this is too much writing for the flash. I have adapted to and now enjoy gnome3. If I were forced to run stable to limit compiles I would still use package.accept_keywords to permit gnome3. Any experiences with testing and ssd? No problems with ~amd64 and gnome3 on SSD in my ThinkPad, for maybe 2yrs already. Thank you. That is just want I wanted to know. allan
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo testing and ssd
Am 2012-07-13 20:53, schrieb Allan Gottlieb: On Fri, Jul 13 2012, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: Am 2012-07-13 19:42, schrieb Allan Gottlieb: I will be getting a new laptop with ssd (250GB). I currently run ~amd64 and wonder if this is too much writing for the flash. I have adapted to and now enjoy gnome3. If I were forced to run stable to limit compiles I would still use package.accept_keywords to permit gnome3. Any experiences with testing and ssd? No problems with ~amd64 and gnome3 on SSD in my ThinkPad, for maybe 2yrs already. Thank you. That is just want I wanted to know. Be sure to check for the latest firmware for the SSD and flash it before even using it. Also check for any well known issues with the particular SSD. And a decent backup strategy is never a bad thing ;-) With that flaky ssd I had scripts to quickly rsync the partitions to hdd-based storage so I could rather quickly switch back and boot from there. That ssd worked and looked OK for weeks and then *ZIP* changed its mind and its size to 0 bytes ... that wasn't too funny. The ssd in my thinkpad is completely robust and problemfree. S
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo testing and ssd
On Fri, Jul 13 2012, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: Am 2012-07-13 20:53, schrieb Allan Gottlieb: On Fri, Jul 13 2012, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: Am 2012-07-13 19:42, schrieb Allan Gottlieb: I will be getting a new laptop with ssd (250GB). I currently run ~amd64 and wonder if this is too much writing for the flash. I have adapted to and now enjoy gnome3. If I were forced to run stable to limit compiles I would still use package.accept_keywords to permit gnome3. Any experiences with testing and ssd? No problems with ~amd64 and gnome3 on SSD in my ThinkPad, for maybe 2yrs already. Thank you. That is just want I wanted to know. Be sure to check for the latest firmware for the SSD and flash it before even using it. Also check for any well known issues with the particular SSD. And a decent backup strategy is never a bad thing ;-) With that flaky ssd I had scripts to quickly rsync the partitions to hdd-based storage so I could rather quickly switch back and boot from there. That ssd worked and looked OK for weeks and then *ZIP* changed its mind and its size to 0 bytes ... that wasn't too funny. The ssd in my thinkpad is completely robust and problemfree. This would be a new dell laptop (latitude E series). I do daily backup of my user data now and will continue with the new laptop. I hope my experiences match yours with the thinkpad. allan
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo testing and ssd
Am Freitag, 13. Juli 2012, 13:42:47 schrieb Allan Gottlieb: I will be getting a new laptop with ssd (250GB). I currently run ~amd64 and wonder if this is too much writing for the flash. I have adapted to and now enjoy gnome3. If I were forced to run stable to limit compiles I would still use package.accept_keywords to permit gnome3. Any experiences with testing and ssd? thanks, allan one ssd for / one ssd for /home ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 098 098 000Old_age Always - 8277 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 099 099 000Old_age Always - 850 175 Program_Fail_Count_Chip 0x0032 100 100 010Old_age Always - 0 176 Erase_Fail_Count_Chip 0x0032 100 100 010Old_age Always - 0 177 Wear_Leveling_Count 0x0013 093 093 017Pre-fail Always - 398 178 Used_Rsvd_Blk_Cnt_Chip 0x0013 083 083 010Pre-fail Always - 10 179 Used_Rsvd_Blk_Cnt_Tot 0x0013 097 097 010Pre-fail Always - 48 180 Unused_Rsvd_Blk_Cnt_Tot 0x0013 097 097 010Pre-fail Always - 1872 181 Program_Fail_Cnt_Total 0x0032 100 100 010Old_age Always - 0 182 Erase_Fail_Count_Total 0x0032 100 100 010Old_age Always - 0 183 Runtime_Bad_Block 0x0013 100 100 010Pre-fail Always - 0 187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age Always - 0 195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered 0x001a 200 200 000Old_age Always - 0 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0030 100 100 000Old_age Offline - 0 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count0x003e 253 253 000Old_age Always - 1 232 Available_Reservd_Space 0x0013 083 083 010Pre-fail Always - 50 233 Media_Wearout_Indicator 0x0032 099 099 000Old_age Always - 2156 and ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 094 094 050Pre-fail Always - 0/6002739 5 Retired_Block_Count 0x0033 100 100 003Pre-fail Always - 2 9 Power_On_Hours_and_Msec 0x0032 098 098 000Old_age Always - 1924h+46m+24.900s 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age Always - 256 171 Program_Fail_Count 0x0032 000 000 000Old_age Always - 2 172 Erase_Fail_Count0x0032 000 000 000Old_age Always - 0 174 Unexpect_Power_Loss_Ct 0x0030 000 000 000Old_age Offline - 5 177 Wear_Range_Delta0x 000 000 000Old_age Offline - 0 181 Program_Fail_Count 0x0032 000 000 000Old_age Always - 2 182 Erase_Fail_Count0x0032 000 000 000Old_age Always - 0 187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age Always - 0 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 030 030 000Old_age Always - 30 (Min/Max 30/30) 195 ECC_Uncorr_Error_Count 0x001c 120 120 000Old_age Offline - 0/6002739 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0033 100 100 003Pre-fail Always - 2 201 Unc_Soft_Read_Err_Rate 0x001c 120 120 000Old_age Offline - 0/6002739 204 Soft_ECC_Correct_Rate 0x001c 120 120 000Old_age Offline - 0/6002739 230 Life_Curve_Status 0x0013 100 100 000Pre-fail Always - 100 231 SSD_Life_Left 0x0013 100 100 010Pre-fail Always - 0 233 SandForce_Internal 0x 000 000 000Old_age Offline - 910 234 SandForce_Internal 0x0032 000 000 000Old_age Always - 786 241 Lifetime_Writes_GiB 0x0032 000 000 000Old_age Always - 786 242 Lifetime_Reads_GiB 0x0032 000 000 000Old_age Always - 2457 testing, kde, + kde-testing overlay but: /var and PORTDIR not on ssd. seriously, intel had once some calculations that even with lots of daily writes you could go on for years as long as you did not fill up the ssd completely. -- #163933
