On 06/20/2012 05:20 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 09:57 -0500, Leonid Isaev wrote
Well, SSD's limited number of write cycles is largerly a myth these days [snip]
A storage drive should be usable in quasi every way. We aren't talking
about an USB stick or DVD RW
. If you need tricks to enlarge the
lifetime, than it's a useless device. I already quoted the Wiki
regarding to the lifetime. It's said that they have a longer lifetime
than modern hard disk drives usually have got. If they shouldn't last
long, just because Linux does write to often log files and you have to
use tricks and need an additional hard disc drive, than this new devices
are crap. Again, what's about noatime etc.? The way they're handled
might be important in a way it's important for HDDs too, e.g. does the
FS require something comparable to M$ FS defragmentation? But if a user
needs to take care about read and write cycles for a storage device IMO
make the usage of a computer too complicated. This is a task for the FS,
the device's controller or whatever.
How often does we need a log file after a regular shutdown? If you copy
them for shutdown, you simply can abandon those files completely.
Just an opinion,
OK guys. When I bought my ssd, I read too that this story of short
lifetime is a myth. As it is now clear to me that writing /var/log into
RAM is a totally fullish idea in case of crash, I am back to my original
fstab, with no entry for /var/log.
I will then take my time to understand rsyslog or syslog-ng.
Ty all for your wise advises.