When Solid State Drives Are Not That Solid

Re:When Solid State Drives Are Not That Solid by douglasheriot on Monday June 15, 2015 @09:28PM (#9723292)

Wow, that sucks. Another reason to use ZFS – you’d notice the corrupted files a lot sooner.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When Solid State Drives Are Not That Solid by Freaky on Monday June 15, 2015 @09:34PM (#9723314)

Yup. I was seeing occasional corruption with my SanDisk Extreme Pro's and quite happy that ZFS was able to repair the damage each time.

The problem appears to have gone away following a firmware update, touch wood.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When Solid State Drives Are Not That Solid by icebraining on Tuesday June 16, 2015 @06:54AM (#9724921)

Or run a verification layer on top of whatever FS you use (e.g. running git fsck would discover corruption in your git indexed files too).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When Solid State Drives Are Not That Solid by ThatPlayer on Monday June 15, 2015 @09:35PM (#9723319)

Or Btrfs on Linux.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When Solid State Drives Are Not That Solid by rleigh on Tuesday June 16, 2015 @03:37AM (#9724263)

In theory, yes. Unfortunately, every time my Btrfs filesystems have encountered a hardware glitch, it has happily trashed the filesystem beyond recovery (including both drives in a RAID1 mirror, one of which was perfectly OK). I use ZFS now, and while some features are compatable with Btrfs, the implementation quality, documentation, and feature completeness, and tool quality set it well above where Btrfs is at.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When Solid State Drives Are Not That Solid by naranja on Tuesday June 16, 2015 @11:12AM (#9726352)

I fully second that: I'm using btrfs for / and ZFS for /srv. So many rashed filesystems beyond recovery on btrfs, so many joy, stability and easy tools for ZFS.

I'm really about to consider to migrate / to ZFS now.

[ Parent | on HN ]