[asterisk-users] Re: On Topic: Cheapest Asterisk USB Key?

Matthew Rubenstein email at mattruby.com
Mon Apr 2 19:12:21 MST 2007

On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 16:30 -0700,
asterisk-users-request at lists.digium.com wrote:
> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 20:26:09 +0100
> From: Thomas Kenyon <digium at sanguinarius.co.uk>
> Subject: [asterisk-users] Re: On Topic: Cheapest Asterisk USB Key?
> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
>         <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>
> Message-ID: <461158D1.2020408 at sanguinarius.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Salvatore Giudice wrote:
> > You should be aware that flash memory is generally not the best
> medium to
> > store data when you have a high number of read/writes. Flash memory
> will
> > fail much more quickly under these conditions.
> Does this mean that devices such as the samsung Flash SSD (part #
> MCAQE32G5APP-0XA00) and the Supertalent Flashdrives are less reliable
> than the HD equivalents. (since reliability is supposed to be their
> biggest selling points)? 

	What it means is that Flash memory cells wear out after a large number
of read/write cycles, but not nearly as large as hard drives:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_rom#Limitations . So using Flash in
place of RAM, even when high speed isn't important, can wear out the
Flash - it will probably wear out even before HDs, which live less long
than does RAM. Until the Flash wears out, it is extremely reliable, and
techniques for ensuring it doesn't destroy data as it wears out are
built into the Flash HW (though it will eventually wear out take data
with it).

	But I'm not talking about using the Flash as RAM, just using it for a
low-load persistent store like a HD, where a HD would be overkill in
every way.

(C) Matthew Rubenstein

More information about the asterisk-users mailing list