Re: Home Directory in SSD

[Martin Steigerwald <martin@lichtvoll.de>]

Am Donnerstag, 11. Februar 2016, 21:40:20 CET schrieb herve:
> On 11/02/2016 15:23, Stefan Monnier wrote
> > I have it all on my SSD, and I use daily backups.
> > Before that, I used an HDD, with the same daily backups.
> >
> > If you don't perform regular backups, then clearly you don't care about 
> > your
> > data, so why bother trying to distinguish if the HDD is ever so slightly
> > less untrustworthy than the SSD?
> >
> > And if you do perform regular backups, then you only need your storage
> > media to be "reliable enough", so again the minute differences in
> > failure scenarios for HDDs and SSDs don't matter because both of them
> > are "reliable enough".
> >
> > The differences are important, tho:
> > - SSDs are silent.
> > - HDDs are not silent.
> > - Some operations are much faster with the SSD (tho those don't
> >    affect me very much, in practice, so it's not the main selling point).
> > - Oh, did I mention how little noise SSDs emit?
> >
> >
> >          Stefan
> That is not untruth, but if you think about ecology, a media that lives 
> 5-10 years is not the same thing that one living 3-5 years.
> 
> You trade lifetime for comfort , maybe another one will make a different 
> choice ? To take en example : you can decide to drive a Ferrari at 160 
> Mph, and you'll gain a lot of time in transfer, but you'll have the risk 
> of an accident and a shorter life. It's your choice, not THE only choice.

I don´t think it is proven that SSDs fail earlier than HDDs. So far none of
the SSDs I use have failed and one is almost 5 years, still thinking about 
itself that it is actually almost new according to SMART data. And the only 
reason it isn´t older is that it is the first SSD I got. I expect it to live 
on for years to come.

So do you have any factual data to prove your claim?

So far I didn´t see any proof that SSDs fail more often or earlier than 
harddisks.

Thanks,
-- 
Martin