mboost-dp1
Seagate
Jeg ved godt det ikke er helt relevant, men synes stadig det er et fedt eksperiment de her folk har lavet
De smækker 20+ SSD'er sammen i RAID til at booste deres computer.
De smækker 20+ SSD'er sammen i RAID til at booste deres computer.
Super lækkert at de bliver bagudkompatible! Det var jeg godt nok lidt nervøs for, for det ville have været en katastrofe hvis de ikke var.
Man kan omgå SATA begrænsningen ved at placere SSDerne på et PCIe kort, som OCZ har gjort med deres 1 TB SSD løsning...
http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/05/oczs-z-drive-pu...
http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/05/oczs-z-drive-pu...
#6 Forstår udemærket hva du mener, men jeg vil da mene at data sakkens kan være framenteret på en SSD. Data kan ligge capisators der er i hver sin "ende". Ved godt at dette overhovedet ikke (hvertfald ikke nogen forskel som man vil kunne mærke, teoretisk vil der vel nok kunne være en lille lille bitte forskel) vil gøre nogen forskel, da en SSD ikke på nogen måde ligner en alm. HDD. Men derfor burde den vel godt kunne samle al dataen et sted. Håber det er til at forstå hvad jeg mener :D
#10:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTYxMSwyLC...
Q. Do SSDs need to be defragmented?
A. Unfortunately this answer isn't exactly straightforward. Solid state drives generally do not organize data the way that HDDs do, or the way the operating system is expecting them to. This is done to overcome the limitations of flash memory (eg. wear leveling). For that reason, standard defrag tools will not make correct decisions about how to optimize the file system layout on an SSD. I would cautiously suggest that anyone using any SSD should disable automatic defrag on that drive and don't bother running it manually. SSDs are exceedingly fast at seeking, so fetching a seemingly scattered file is going to be nearly as fast as fetching a file that is written sequentially. A traditional HDD will fetch that same scattered file drastically slower, which was the original motivation for defragmentation.
That said, there certainly are best and worst case layouts for data organization on SSD media. Currently the firmware is responsible for keeping everything as organized as possible. There might be a new opportunity for tools to be developed that will "defragment" an SSD, but they may need inside knowledge of how each SSD works. The magnitude of the fragmentation problem is reduced though, because the performance difference between an optimal layout and worst case isn't nearly as crippling as with a HDD.
Så kan folk rate mig som de vil, ændre ikke på at deframentere end SSD er "hovedet-oppe-i-anus"...og derfor jeg siger de folk er clueless...uanset hvor "seje" n00b's så synes de er...
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTYxMSwyLC...
Q. Do SSDs need to be defragmented?
A. Unfortunately this answer isn't exactly straightforward. Solid state drives generally do not organize data the way that HDDs do, or the way the operating system is expecting them to. This is done to overcome the limitations of flash memory (eg. wear leveling). For that reason, standard defrag tools will not make correct decisions about how to optimize the file system layout on an SSD. I would cautiously suggest that anyone using any SSD should disable automatic defrag on that drive and don't bother running it manually. SSDs are exceedingly fast at seeking, so fetching a seemingly scattered file is going to be nearly as fast as fetching a file that is written sequentially. A traditional HDD will fetch that same scattered file drastically slower, which was the original motivation for defragmentation.
That said, there certainly are best and worst case layouts for data organization on SSD media. Currently the firmware is responsible for keeping everything as organized as possible. There might be a new opportunity for tools to be developed that will "defragment" an SSD, but they may need inside knowledge of how each SSD works. The magnitude of the fragmentation problem is reduced though, because the performance difference between an optimal layout and worst case isn't nearly as crippling as with a HDD.
Så kan folk rate mig som de vil, ændre ikke på at deframentere end SSD er "hovedet-oppe-i-anus"...og derfor jeg siger de folk er clueless...uanset hvor "seje" n00b's så synes de er...
#Terra , du er sku da noget af en bonehead.
Defrag sætter jo ikke kun fragmenter sammen, de flytter jo også al data så det ligger tættest på midten(eller er det omvendt) af diskens skive. Der er selvfølgelig ikke nogen skive i ssd, men det ændrer ikke på at et defrag tit flytter en stor del af hele diskens data, og det er jo der det er sjovt at se hvor hurtigt det går.
Selvfølgelig er det nytteløst, men det er jo for fan' bare for sjov.
Defrag sætter jo ikke kun fragmenter sammen, de flytter jo også al data så det ligger tættest på midten(eller er det omvendt) af diskens skive. Der er selvfølgelig ikke nogen skive i ssd, men det ændrer ikke på at et defrag tit flytter en stor del af hele diskens data, og det er jo der det er sjovt at se hvor hurtigt det går.
Selvfølgelig er det nytteløst, men det er jo for fan' bare for sjov.
Opret dig som bruger i dag
Det er gratis, og du binder dig ikke til noget.
Når du er oprettet som bruger, får du adgang til en lang række af sidens andre muligheder, såsom at udforme siden efter eget ønske og deltage i diskussionerne.
- Forside
- ⟨
- Forum
- ⟨
- Nyheder
Gå til bund