Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2018 08:20:46 +0100, Lucifer Morningstar

SSDs are not used in servers due to their unreliability.

They are MORE reliable than rotating rust disks.

I they're not used in servers it's because they can't stand the higher
amount of writing. And that depends on what you're doing with the
server. If i made a server where I wanted fast disk access, but it
wasn't written in huge quantities, I'd use SSDs.

https://ark.intel.com/products/97164...#tab-blade-1-0

# Capacity 750 GB
# Endurance Rating (Lifetime Writes) 41000 TBW
# Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) 2 million hours
# Enhanced Power Loss Data Protection Yes === "I'm an enterprise product"

That drive can be written end to end, about 55000 times,
if you believe the endurance rating.

There are also flash based storage subsystems with internal
RAID, such that if a chip fails, another (unused) chip can
be put in place of it, and rebuilt using redundancy info
in the chip array. I think this is called RAIN.

https://www.micron.com/~/media/docum...f_ssd_rain.pdf

It's possible there are also flash drives (think of a 4U form
factor), where flash chips are arranged on cards, and can
be replaced hot when they fail. Take the top off, plug in a
new card (wait for rebuild). These are products you won't find
on the web, and if you have to ask the price, you can't afford
one. (It's similar to PCI Express, where there are all sorts of
whizzy PCI Express technologies out there, which aren't advertised
on the web. Those might be used in HPC environments.)

Most of the advertising we see, is for the "rubbish stuff" :-)

Paul