I agree! Many of the SSD "tweaks" mentioned are unnecessary and seem to originate from the early days of consumer SSDs (2007-early 2009).
In short: do not try to protect your SSD. Use part of the SSD as a cache for your HDDs (native support by LVM) Disable browser cache: facepalm, just try browsing like this.
Gentoo check ssd health windows#
Do not enable hibernation: Maybe we should return to windows '98 Do not use btrfs: compression, deduplication, COW, snapshots etc are very useful for the small sized SSDs Use noatime: this is old, use relatime. What worths more? The SSD or the ability to do my work without hinders? The zero-seek times (compared to HDDs) made the dreaded swap operations almost imperceptible. The first thing I did when I got a SSD was to put the swap on it. Use it to hide your setup's shortcomings.Ĭouple years back, I had only 8GB of RAM on my system. If one wants to “get his money back” the best way is to utilize the SSD to its fullest instead of trying to preserve it for ten years. Its advantage is its speed, especially in seek times, but also on read/write operations. A SSD offers small capacity for a big price. After all, if a tool lasts for ten years, you'll only ever buy ten of them in your lifetime. relatime has been available since ~2007 and was made a part of the defaults mount option since ~2009.
There's also something to be said about not worrying about wear when using highly durable tools that are designed to last for a decade or more. I know: I've been using the same laptop for the past eight years. There's something to be said for frugality. Today I can spend ~$400 and get a 1TB drive that's substantially faster than and at least as reliable as this one. My ~five year old 100GB SSD is still going strong. Five years is a long time in the SSD market. What's more, you're going to pains -however small- to extend the life of something that will easily last for far more than five years. We need fewer top-ten lists of cargo-cult suggestions to extend the life of your PC, not more. It's clear that the author hasn't gone to the trouble to fact or efficacy check most of his assertions. The thing is, the linked article is a grab bag of outdated (mount filesystems with noatime ) or just plain wrong (btrfs is bad for SSDs) factoids and bits of advice. You latched on to the least important part of my comment. (But make sure to also check out the intro article. Regardless of who you are, strongly consider benchmarking any configuration tweaks that folks claim will improve performance. In short, if you've a consumer or developer's workload, don't worry about SSD media longevity. SMART indicates that zero blocks have been reallocated and that the drive is in perfect health. Under this workload and configuration, I have written 20.4TB and read 66.8TB over 3.9 years. Other than mounting my filesystems with the "discard" option, I've performed no SSD-specific configuration step or fiddled with any VM tunables. To provide some perspective for those numbers: My Linux laptop has encrypted swap, btrfs root partiton, and encrypted btrfs /home all on the SSD, and sees frequent compiles-from-source (I run Gentoo Linux.). If we look at Tech Report's SSD Torture Test, we know with some confidence that consumer-level SSDs will endure hundreds of TBs of writes before failing.
People Who Know in the industry know that any non-bottom-of-the-barrel SSD bought in the last -like- five years or so will endure many tens of TBs of writes. This pretty much all seems to be a lot of fiddly work that tries to reduce writes to your SSD.
0 kommentar(er)
