miriam_e: from my drawing MoonGirl (Default)
[personal profile] miriam_e
My mind is jumping all over the place. I'll write this out to stop me thinking any more about it.

If you have a Flash RAM card in your camera, or handheld computer, or mp3 player, or you have one of those little pendant-sized Flash RAM USB drive devices, what is the best way to use them?

They have only a limited number of read-write cycles before they fail. A strategy is needed to ensure the longest possible lifetime. I've been thinking about it (while I lay awake in bed this morning trying to sleep). Here are my thoughts:

Avoid deleting files until the device is full. At that point delete everything and start fresh. This lets you get maximum use out of it. Each memory location gets used precisely once in each write/delete cycle. This gives you thousands of uses before it begins to fail. Of course if the device gets used on a computer then this may be impractical as there may be many files that you will want to have permanent access to. In that case take a similar approach, but keep those files, but give the device a clean-out of all unnecessary files when it is full. Avoid deleting till you've filled it, then go through in a big spring-clean to maximise space and start filling it again.

Remember: deleting counts down the number of uses you get. Accumulating stuff in the device till full ensures you don't use any memory cell more than once over as long a period of time possible.

Date: 2006-10-31 09:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] drjon.livejournal.com
So a read access is okay? It's just deleting which degrades memory locations?

Date: 2006-10-31 11:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] miriam-e.livejournal.com
Yeah I believe reads are OK. I think it is writing that degrades them.

In most cases you don't write to a location unless that location is empty. Over-writing or updating a file would rewrite to an already used location, but I can't think of any easy way around that, except perhaps giving the updated file a new name each time.
From: [identity profile] grumpleskin.livejournal.com
Apparently the devices are designed to somehow spread the use around the memory map so that even small files won't always be saved to the same memory cells. I wonder if that solves the files index problem. As Martin Banks once pointed out in an article on WORM disks, one file always being rewritten in MsDOS is the FAT. In Tripos/AmigaDOS & I think OS2 HPFS, & probably NTFS, "disk" records are written in lots of places, which MIGHT make things worse, especially if it's nearly full. Or maybe not. For (Uni/Linu)x file systems? ?**2

I think you'd better consult uber nerds.

Remember, it isn't really backed up until it's printed on stripey paper.

("Werp email? She'll no take it Captain!)

Profile

miriam_e: from my drawing MoonGirl (Default)
miriam_e

January 2026

S M T W T F S
    1 23
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 13th, 2026 07:29 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios