Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:TLC NAND = unstable? (Score 1) 42

by SQL Error (#49360521) Attached to: Toshiba Announces 3D Flash With 48 Layers

Well, it won't be the same price - it requires a more complex fab process - but yeah. Consumer MLC drives have proven themselves to be robust and reliable, for the most part. TLC still seems to be a bridge a little too far.

I'd like to see Tech Report re-run their endurance test with current drive models. The only "problem" is that drives are so good now that by the time the best model fails and we get the final score, none of them will be on the market any more.

Comment: Re:The butting edge (Score 1) 42

by SQL Error (#49360509) Attached to: Toshiba Announces 3D Flash With 48 Layers

A huge proportion of computing is moving to the cloud. Conventional disk storage is a nightmare for cloud services because there's such a huge disparity between sequential I/O and random I/O performance. CPU, memory, and network bandwidth all divide up nicely, but as soon as you have contention for disk I/O, it all falls apart.

This is known as the "noisy neighbour" problem. You might be happy and fine on your cheap VPS for months, and then the next day it collapses in a heap, even though you're getting the same allocation of resources you always have. It takes a lot of complex engineering and expert management to keep noisy neighbours at bay.

SSDs eliminate this, because SSD performance on multi-threaded random I/O is not far short of even their best-case sequential performance. Which means that every cloud provider wants to move to pure SSD. Exabytes worth of it. I work for a relatively small company, and we have 1.5PB of disk that we'd love to convert to SSD.

That SSD needs to be dense and reliable. Smaller process nodes improved density at a cost of write cycles. 3D flash gives us improved density and increased write cycles at a cost of more complex fabrication.

The market is there, all right.

Comment: Re:Swap drive now? (Score 1) 204

by SQL Error (#49246807) Attached to: Endurance Experiment Kills Six SSDs Over 18 Months, 2.4 Petabytes

No, really, I've done it. Loaded up a 4GB ultrabook with lots of applications and Chrome tabs and a couple of Virtualbox CentOS instances, over 6GB in active use. Switching apps initially took a couple of seconds as it settled down to a realistic working set, but after than that you couldn't tell that it was swapping at all.

I've done it on spinning disk too, of course, and that couple of seconds was closer to a minute.

As long as you're not actively thrashing - as long as your working set still fits in RAM - swapping to SSD is pretty much painless.

Comment: Re:Swap drive now? (Score 1) 204

by SQL Error (#49246783) Attached to: Endurance Experiment Kills Six SSDs Over 18 Months, 2.4 Petabytes

Yes. I've done exactly this, on both cheap ultrabooks with 4GB ram and huge Linux servers with 512GB of RAM. (We have a 2.5TB Redis cluster that was running out of space waiting for additional nodes to be commissioned.)

It works. It works well. It's not a panacea, but it's an enormous improvement over swapping to spinning disk. Night and day.

+ - Lenovo Accused of Pushing Self-signed MITM Proxy-> 2

Submitted by jones_supa
jones_supa writes: More OEM crapware coming at you. Chinese hardware manufacturer Lenovo has come under fire for allegedly shipping consumer Windows laptops with software that hijacks secure website connections, as well as inserting ads into search results. The software is called "Superfish" and it installs its own self-signed root certificate authority. Superfish comes with Lenovo consumer products only, and is a technology that helps users "find and discover products visually". The technology instantly analyzes images on the web and presents identical and similar product offers. Google's Chris Palmer has been analyzing the issue on a Yoga 2 laptop. He has confirmed with one other affected user that the certificates used share the same key, which leaves any impacted Lenovo user vulnerable to an attack from anyone able to extract the certificate's private key, with the user left without any warning or notice of such an attack. Superfish can be uninstalled, but it reportedly leaves the root certificate authority behind. On a new laptop, the software can be disabled simply by not accepting the Terms of User and Privacy Policy on initial setup.
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Let me get this straight (Score 3, Informative) 158

by SQL Error (#48599447) Attached to: 9th Circuit Will Revisit "Innocence of Muslims" Takedown Order

Well, it goes many ways to Sunday, but long story short this has potential uses. Just imagine if an extra on Stupid Franchise That Needs To Die VII could get it yanked if "I didn't expect a certain character to make any appearances" could be a valid argument. (Though I joke, misrepresentation of contract is legally dishonest but should have been a tort with the production team, not a DMCA claim with hosts. She should have taken it one rung up the ladder, so to speak - Google is "too late" in that process.)

This exactly. Its not that the actress doesn't have rights here, it's that the court affirmed the wrong rights. If the filmmaker materially misrepresented the film or the role in writing, that should be a fairly straightforward lawsuit.

Reactor error - core dumped!