Hi Yamaban,
On Sun, 2016-10-30 at 11:10 +0100, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:
> Still no argument to replace an existing working one... And as I asked
> Valeri, can you please provide us with links indicating the poor quality
> of Corsair SSDs (in general)?
Well never mind that request, very inter
Hello Yamaban,
On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 19:38 +0200, Yamaban wrote:
> For my personal use I would replace that Drive asap.
> - There is no warranty for it anymore (time since buy)
I fail to see how that is relevant... If you lose your data because of a
failing disk you lose your data. Whether or not
Hello Valeri,
On Fri, 2016-10-28 at 09:28 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> Amazing. He suggested you definitely reliable drive (Samsung). Reliable in
> my boot too. You ask his opinion about yet another Corsair. One by Corsair
> failed on you already.
It did not. He asked whether it did but there i
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 21:03, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
Hi Yamaban,
Great expalanation. I think you know how to buy an ssd. There is no doubt
about samsung ssds quality vs other. My question about neutron was to get
your opinion about this product.
My doubt was about differences between slc, mlc an
Hi Yamaban,
Great expalanation. I think you know how to buy an ssd. There is no doubt
about samsung ssds quality vs other. My question about neutron was to get
your opinion about this product.
My doubt was about differences between slc, mlc and tlc. Mlc endurance
respect tlc is better and I though
For me the answer for this is: use what you need. For example consider
raid.
On my desktop I have an mdadm raid level mirror. It is only a desktop used
for some task at home (testing, coding...). Why buy a valid controller like
areca or (as suggested on a discussion, maybe on reddit) an HBA to make
On Fri, October 28, 2016 11:50 am, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
> Il 28/10/2016 16:28, Valeri Galtsev ha scritto:
>>
>> On Fri, October 28, 2016 2:42 am, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
>>> Il 27/10/2016 19:38, Yamaban ha scritto:
For my personal use I would replace that Drive asap.
- There is no war
Il 28/10/2016 16:28, Valeri Galtsev ha scritto:
On Fri, October 28, 2016 2:42 am, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
Il 27/10/2016 19:38, Yamaban ha scritto:
For my personal use I would replace that Drive asap.
- There is no warranty for it anymore (time since buy)
- You can't buy it new anymore (discont
On Fri, October 28, 2016 2:42 am, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
> Il 27/10/2016 19:38, Yamaban ha scritto:
>> For my personal use I would replace that Drive asap.
>> - There is no warranty for it anymore (time since buy)
>> - You can't buy it new anymore (discontinued)
>> - There are more reliable drive
Il 27/10/2016 19:38, Yamaban ha scritto:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:25, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
Il 24/10/2016 14:05, Leonard den Ottolander ha scritto:
On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 12:07 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
> === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
> SMART Error Log not supported
I reckon
On 10/27/2016 09:43 AM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
Il 27/10/2016 13:58, Leonard den Ottolander ha scritto:
Hi,
On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 11:25 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED
That's the line you are look
Il 27/10/2016 13:58, Leonard den Ottolander ha scritto:
Hi,
On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 11:25 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED
That's the line you are looking for. Since your disk apparently does not
sto
Hi,
On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 11:25 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
> === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
> SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED
That's the line you are looking for. Since your disk apparently does not
store an error log - not sure if that's something with SSDs
Il 24/10/2016 14:05, Leonard den Ottolander ha scritto:
Hi,
On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 12:07 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART Error Log not supported
I reckon there's a between those lines. The line right after the
first should read something like:
SM
Hi,
On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 12:07 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
> === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
> SMART Error Log not supported
I reckon there's a between those lines. The line right after the
first should read something like:
SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED
Il 21/10/2016 17:20, m.r...@5-cent.us ha scritto:
John R Pierce wrote:
On 10/21/2016 2:03 AM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
My ssds are failing?
SSD's wear out based on writes per block. they distribute those
writes, but once each block has been written X number of times, they are
no longer reli
John R Pierce wrote:
> On 10/21/2016 2:03 AM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
>>
>> My ssds are failing?
>
> SSD's wear out based on writes per block. they distribute those
> writes, but once each block has been written X number of times, they are
> no longer reliable.
>
> they appear to still be working
Hello Alessandro,
On Fri, 2016-10-21 at 11:03 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
> ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED
> WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
>1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 100 100 050Pre-fail Always
>- 0/4754882
smartctl -A only show
On 10/21/2016 2:03 AM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
My ssds are failing?
SSD's wear out based on writes per block. they distribute those
writes, but once each block has been written X number of times, they are
no longer reliable.
they appear to still be working perfectly, but they are beyond
Hi list,
on my workstation I've a md raid (mirror) for / on md1. This raid has 2
ssd as members (each corsair GT force 120GB MLC). This disks are ~ 5
years old.
Today I've checked my ssds smart status and I get:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED
WHEN_FAILED
20 matches
Mail list logo
