If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rating: | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
On 5/25/2014 4:41 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , BillW50 writes: [] Boy we sure do many things the same way. Although I have delayed longer on my older machines to SSD and I just started recently. And they are going to all get 120GB SSD I believe for now. I was a bit concern about an SSD on this machine in particular, since it also has a TV tuner connected and does a far amount of TV recording sometimes. Although monitoring the lifetime writes, I don't think I'll hit the limit for at least 10 years. Plus it won't be long before this one is cloned and replaced with another SSD anyway. Maybe 256GB next time around. I take it that the two of you cloners (I agree cloning's better than backing up if you can afford all the extra drives) always swap the drives, i. e. remove and store the drive you cloned from and install the clone, whenever you do it - as a (quick and dirty, see next post) way of ensuring the clone is successful. When you do this, and the drive you are putting into storage is an SSD, do you label it with how much life it has left? I always keep track of my drives noting the hours on and the S.M.A.R.T. readings. I've been using SSDs for some time now so I'm curious how long one might take to fail. This curiosity is unfulfilled to date as I keep replacing them for larger ones. Now the older smaller ones go on a shelf or in an external enclosure. I do label them also just so I can keep track of which one is which. Sometimes I save a notes file explaining more. As to how much life is left that I feel is an unknown. Sort of like myself at my age. I'm already keeping notes in my pockets. Some say "look in other pocket". |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
In ,
J. P. Gilliver (John) typed: In message , BillW50 writes: In , Gene E. Bloch typed: [] Also, a clone needs to be tested too. Even a supposed exact copy could end up being inexact. Oh yes, absolutely! I clone and use the clone and save the original (you were using it and you know that one works). If the clone fails, you would know right away if it doesn't boot. And you will be using it until the next clone. So you have time to make sure everything works ok. How do you decide when the testing is complete? Obviously if it doesn't boot, it has failed, but if it does boot, what further testing (e. g. of applications) do you do - if any? I got burned once with one of my Asus EeePC. I found out months later my method of cloning broke MS Works v9. I almost never use it, as I use Office instead. But when I did, MS Works won't load and a message saying that MS Works needs to be reinstalled. Asus didn't supply me with a MS Works install CD. Rather they only supplied me with an image of Windows XP and Works preinstalled. About this time (back in 2009), booting Ubuntu 8 Live from a flash drive and I doing nothing else with Ubuntu and shutting it down. XP would hang on the desktop with a Window saying Windows Installer and that is all. I believe Ubuntu auto mounts the XP drive, but it shouldn't be changing anything on the drive itself. But somehow something changed. Paul and myself tried to duplicate this problem recently and neither one of us could cause it reoccur again. And now suddenly (as I am typing this) I am thinking that maybe this is the missing piece. I was cloning by using BartPE and A43 (file manager) and by copying everything except the System Volume Information folder and the temp folders. Apparently something was wrong using that method. If MS Works didn't break, I might be still using this method today because everything else was working just fine. -- Bill Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet ('09 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2 Centrino Core2 Duo L7400 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 SP2 |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
In ,
AlDrake typed: On 5/22/2014 12:50 PM, BillW50 wrote: In , AlDrake typed: On 5/21/2014 5:55 PM, BillW50 wrote: In , Boy we sure do many things the same way. Although I have delayed longer on my older machines to SSD and I just started recently. And they are going to all get 120GB SSD I believe for now. I was a bit concern about an SSD on this machine in particular, since it also has a TV tuner connected and does a far amount of TV recording sometimes. Although monitoring the lifetime writes, I don't think I'll hit the limit for at least 10 years. Plus it won't be long before this one is cloned and replaced with another SSD anyway. Maybe 256GB next time around. I can't see myself going larger than the Crucial M550 512GB but I'm waiting to see if they start using faster chips than the Micron. My newer machines came stock with SSD and they are fine and I haven't had a desire to upgrade those yet. The ones that I am upgrading right now had SATA (type 1) 7200rpm hard drives. Since the SATA port can only handle 150MB/s tops, I am not interested in anything faster anyway. So cheap, slow, and reliable will get the job done on these machines. I wasn't sure what to expect on such systems. Since 95% of the time the hard drive wasn't doing anything anyway. But boy, it is a huge difference. Boot times are 5 times faster, games loads five times faster, and most applications load in a blink of an eye. Nor do I have to be careful about bumping the machine while moving around with it. Head crashes are a thing of the past. You have an advantage because they're much cheaper then when I started purchasing SSDs. I put one in my ASUS Eee PC and at the time the SSD cost more than the netbook. Oh yes, I remember. Although what I liked in the early days of SSD, was most SSD were the SLC type and MLC type were the ones that were hard to find. Today it is just the opposite. I would prefer SLC SSDs, but they are so hard to find nowadays. But MLC SSDs are more reliable as ever and cheaper than they ever have been. So I guess it isn't so bad anymore. :-) Yes, I like the speed too. I think it's not beneficial to keep an HDD installed as it's powered and produces heat. The only system I have any in is my InWin BUC666 http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=CA-017-IW that has side access though a locked door. Oh wow! I really like that! That could make me move away from laptops and tablets and go back to desktops once again. :-D -- Bill Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet ('09 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2 Centrino Core2 Duo L7400 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 SP2 |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
In ,
AlDrake typed: On 5/25/2014 4:41 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , BillW50 writes: [] Boy we sure do many things the same way. Although I have delayed longer on my older machines to SSD and I just started recently. And they are going to all get 120GB SSD I believe for now. I was a bit concern about an SSD on this machine in particular, since it also has a TV tuner connected and does a far amount of TV recording sometimes. Although monitoring the lifetime writes, I don't think I'll hit the limit for at least 10 years. Plus it won't be long before this one is cloned and replaced with another SSD anyway. Maybe 256GB next time around. I take it that the two of you cloners (I agree cloning's better than backing up if you can afford all the extra drives) always swap the drives, i. e. remove and store the drive you cloned from and install the clone, whenever you do it - as a (quick and dirty, see next post) way of ensuring the clone is successful. When you do this, and the drive you are putting into storage is an SSD, do you label it with how much life it has left? I always keep track of my drives noting the hours on and the S.M.A.R.T. readings. I've been using SSDs for some time now so I'm curious how long one might take to fail. This curiosity is unfulfilled to date as I keep replacing them for larger ones. Now the older smaller ones go on a shelf or in an external enclosure. I do label them also just so I can keep track of which one is which. Sometimes I save a notes file explaining more. As to how much life is left that I feel is an unknown. Sort of like myself at my age. I'm already keeping notes in my pockets. Some say "look in other pocket". Yes I too just use the SMART info for checking the health of the SSD (see below). Although I do label each drive with from what machine, OS, and the date cloned. This tablet I am on right now still has a hard drive 1.8" with a ZIF connector. And 1.8" SSD with ZIF connectors are rare and expensive yet. So I haven't changed this one yet. But I also have another machine running now and grabbed the SMART info from the SSD. As you can see it reports things like hours, lifetime writes, temperature, etc. SMART READ DATA Revision: 10 Attributes List 1: (SSD Raw Read Error Rate) Normalized Rate: 95 Sectors Read: 9235732 Read Errors: 0 5: (SSD Retired Block Count) Spare blocks remaining 100% Retired Block 0 9: (SSD Power-On Hours) Value 100 Total 79 hrs 55 mins 12: (SSD Power Cycle Count) Power Cycle Life Remaining 100% Number of power cycles 32 171: (SSD Program Fail Count) Program Error Count 0 172: (SSD Erase Fail Count) Erase Error Count 0 174: (SSD Unexpected power loss count) Unexpected power loss Count 4 177: (Wear Range Delta) Wear Range Delta 0% 181: (Program Fail Count) Program Error Count 0 182: (Erase Fail Count) Erase Error Count 0 187: (SSD Reported Uncorrectable Errors) Normalized Value 100 lifetime URAISE Errors 0 189: (Unrecognized Attribute) Value: 38 Raw Data: 26 00 30 00 14 00 00 194: (SSD Temperature Monitoring) Normalized temp 38 Current 38 High 48 Low 20 195: (SSD ECC On-the-fly Count) Normalized Value 120 Sectors Read 9235732 UECC Count 0 196: (SSD Reallocation Event Count) Normalized Value 100 Reallocation Event Count 0 201: (SSD Uncorrectable Soft Read Error Rate)Normalized Value 120 Sectors Read 9235732 Uncorrectable Soft Error Count 0 204: (SSD Soft ECC Correction Rate (RAISE) Normalized Value 120 Sectors Read 9235732 Soft ECC Correction Count 0 230: (SSD Life Curve Status) Normalized Value 100 231: (SSD Life Left) Life Remaining 100% 233: (SSD Internal Reserved) 155 234: (SSD Internal Reserved) 169 241: (SSD Lifetime writes from host) lifetime writes 169 242: (SSD Lifetime reads from host) lifetime reads 137 -- Bill Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet ('09 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2 Centrino Core2 Duo L7400 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 SP2 |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
On 5/27/2014 5:57 AM, BillW50 wrote:
In , AlDrake typed: On 5/22/2014 12:50 PM, BillW50 wrote: In , AlDrake typed: On 5/21/2014 5:55 PM, BillW50 wrote: In , Boy we sure do many things the same way. Although I have delayed longer on my older machines to SSD and I just started recently. And they are going to all get 120GB SSD I believe for now. I was a bit concern about an SSD on this machine in particular, since it also has a TV tuner connected and does a far amount of TV recording sometimes. Although monitoring the lifetime writes, I don't think I'll hit the limit for at least 10 years. Plus it won't be long before this one is cloned and replaced with another SSD anyway. Maybe 256GB next time around. I can't see myself going larger than the Crucial M550 512GB but I'm waiting to see if they start using faster chips than the Micron. My newer machines came stock with SSD and they are fine and I haven't had a desire to upgrade those yet. The ones that I am upgrading right now had SATA (type 1) 7200rpm hard drives. Since the SATA port can only handle 150MB/s tops, I am not interested in anything faster anyway. So cheap, slow, and reliable will get the job done on these machines. I wasn't sure what to expect on such systems. Since 95% of the time the hard drive wasn't doing anything anyway. But boy, it is a huge difference. Boot times are 5 times faster, games loads five times faster, and most applications load in a blink of an eye. Nor do I have to be careful about bumping the machine while moving around with it. Head crashes are a thing of the past. You have an advantage because they're much cheaper then when I started purchasing SSDs. I put one in my ASUS Eee PC and at the time the SSD cost more than the netbook. Oh yes, I remember. Although what I liked in the early days of SSD, was most SSD were the SLC type and MLC type were the ones that were hard to find. Today it is just the opposite. I would prefer SLC SSDs, but they are so hard to find nowadays. But MLC SSDs are more reliable as ever and cheaper than they ever have been. So I guess it isn't so bad anymore. :-) Yes, I like the speed too. I think it's not beneficial to keep an HDD installed as it's powered and produces heat. The only system I have any in is my InWin BUC666 http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=CA-017-IW that has side access though a locked door. Oh wow! I really like that! That could make me move away from laptops and tablets and go back to desktops once again. :-D I think I done buying cases though. I probably will reuse the ones I have and just upgrade the motherboards and all that goes along with them. All my cases have plenty of room for water cooling if I get real serious. http://store.antec.com/Product/enclo...5-15920-3.aspx This one was fun to work with although a bit heavy. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
On 5/27/2014 6:45 AM, BillW50 wrote:
In , AlDrake typed: On 5/25/2014 4:41 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , BillW50 writes: [] Boy we sure do many things the same way. Although I have delayed longer on my older machines to SSD and I just started recently. And they are going to all get 120GB SSD I believe for now. I was a bit concern about an SSD on this machine in particular, since it also has a TV tuner connected and does a far amount of TV recording sometimes. Although monitoring the lifetime writes, I don't think I'll hit the limit for at least 10 years. Plus it won't be long before this one is cloned and replaced with another SSD anyway. Maybe 256GB next time around. I take it that the two of you cloners (I agree cloning's better than backing up if you can afford all the extra drives) always swap the drives, i. e. remove and store the drive you cloned from and install the clone, whenever you do it - as a (quick and dirty, see next post) way of ensuring the clone is successful. When you do this, and the drive you are putting into storage is an SSD, do you label it with how much life it has left? I always keep track of my drives noting the hours on and the S.M.A.R.T. readings. I've been using SSDs for some time now so I'm curious how long one might take to fail. This curiosity is unfulfilled to date as I keep replacing them for larger ones. Now the older smaller ones go on a shelf or in an external enclosure. I do label them also just so I can keep track of which one is which. Sometimes I save a notes file explaining more. As to how much life is left that I feel is an unknown. Sort of like myself at my age. I'm already keeping notes in my pockets. Some say "look in other pocket". Yes I too just use the SMART info for checking the health of the SSD (see below). Although I do label each drive with from what machine, OS, and the date cloned. This tablet I am on right now still has a hard drive 1.8" with a ZIF connector. And 1.8" SSD with ZIF connectors are rare and expensive yet. So I haven't changed this one yet. But I also have another machine running now and grabbed the SMART info from the SSD. As you can see it reports things like hours, lifetime writes, temperature, etc. SMART READ DATA Revision: 10 Attributes List 1: (SSD Raw Read Error Rate) Normalized Rate: 95 Sectors Read: 9235732 Read Errors: 0 5: (SSD Retired Block Count) Spare blocks remaining 100% Retired Block 0 9: (SSD Power-On Hours) Value 100 Total 79 hrs 55 mins 12: (SSD Power Cycle Count) Power Cycle Life Remaining 100% Number of power cycles 32 171: (SSD Program Fail Count) Program Error Count 0 172: (SSD Erase Fail Count) Erase Error Count 0 174: (SSD Unexpected power loss count) Unexpected power loss Count 4 177: (Wear Range Delta) Wear Range Delta 0% 181: (Program Fail Count) Program Error Count 0 182: (Erase Fail Count) Erase Error Count 0 187: (SSD Reported Uncorrectable Errors) Normalized Value 100 lifetime URAISE Errors 0 189: (Unrecognized Attribute) Value: 38 Raw Data: 26 00 30 00 14 00 00 194: (SSD Temperature Monitoring) Normalized temp 38 Current 38 High 48 Low 20 195: (SSD ECC On-the-fly Count) Normalized Value 120 Sectors Read 9235732 UECC Count 0 196: (SSD Reallocation Event Count) Normalized Value 100 Reallocation Event Count 0 201: (SSD Uncorrectable Soft Read Error Rate)Normalized Value 120 Sectors Read 9235732 Uncorrectable Soft Error Count 0 204: (SSD Soft ECC Correction Rate (RAISE) Normalized Value 120 Sectors Read 9235732 Soft ECC Correction Count 0 230: (SSD Life Curve Status) Normalized Value 100 231: (SSD Life Left) Life Remaining 100% 233: (SSD Internal Reserved) 155 234: (SSD Internal Reserved) 169 241: (SSD Lifetime writes from host) lifetime writes 169 242: (SSD Lifetime reads from host) lifetime reads 137 Yup, gotta have it. I am not happy with Acronis Drive Monitor though. It tries to get be to believe my OCZ Agility 3 is running at 212 Deg. F and my new Crucial M550 512 GB reports Reallocation Event Count Degradation Smart Attribute ID 196. Crystal Disk Info 4.5.0 says no such thing. It's been a while since I've seen a Ziff connector. I think I might need one for a few Hitachi 6BG Microdrives I have while it's smaller than the standard size. If it's even that indeed. http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/370782152622?lpid=82 |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
On Tue, 27 May 2014 03:42:45 -0400, AlDrake wrote:
As to how much life is left that I feel is an unknown. Sort of like myself at my age. I'm already keeping notes in my pockets. Some say "look in other pocket". Thanks. You may have given me a solution to my problem. :-) -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
In message , AlDrake
writes: On 5/25/2014 4:41 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: [] When you do this, and the drive you are putting into storage is an SSD, do you label it with how much life it has left? I always keep track of my drives noting the hours on and the S.M.A.R.T. readings. I've been using SSDs for some time now so I'm curious how long one might take to fail. This curiosity is unfulfilled to date as I keep replacing them for larger ones. Now the older smaller ones go on a shelf or in an external enclosure. I do label them also just so I can keep track of which one is which. Sometimes I save a notes file explaining more. As to how much life is left that I feel is an unknown. Sort of like myself at my age. I'm already keeping notes in my pockets. Some say "look in other pocket". LOL! I like it. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf 10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
In message , BillW50
writes: [] On 5/25/2014 4:41 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: [] When you do this, and the drive you are putting into storage is an SSD, do you label it with how much life it has left? [] Yes I too just use the SMART info for checking the health of the SSD (see below). Although I do label each drive with from what machine, OS, [] SMART READ DATA [] 230: (SSD Life Curve Status) Normalized Value 100 231: (SSD Life Left) Life Remaining 100% 233: (SSD Internal Reserved) 155 234: (SSD Internal Reserved) 169 241: (SSD Lifetime writes from host) lifetime writes 169 242: (SSD Lifetime reads from host) lifetime reads 137 I'm puzzled by "Life Remaining 100%". From all I've read here (and I think in the XP 'group too), I understood that SSDs had a definite and finite life, in terms of numbers of writes - and, even if they might actually last longer in practice, had a built-in counter that counted down as you used them, and eventually suddenly declares them read-only. With that (probably mis-!)understanding, I wasn't expecting to see a 100% remaining one. (And are values 241 and 242 above given with some indication of what proportion of the total allowable they are?) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf 10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
[]
In , AlDrake typed: [] Yes, I like the speed too. I think it's not beneficial to keep an HDD installed as it's powered and produces heat. The only system I have any in is my InWin BUC666 http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=CA-017-IW that has side access though a locked door. [] Side access is good - but what purpose does the lock serve? If someone's going to steal them, they'll either take the whole computer, or wrench off the door thus damaging the case if it's locked? -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf 10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0. |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
In ,
J. P. Gilliver (John) typed: In message , BillW50 writes: [] On 5/25/2014 4:41 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: [] When you do this, and the drive you are putting into storage is an SSD, do you label it with how much life it has left? [] Yes I too just use the SMART info for checking the health of the SSD (see below). Although I do label each drive with from what machine, OS, [] SMART READ DATA [] 230: (SSD Life Curve Status) Normalized Value 100 231: (SSD Life Left) Life Remaining 100% 233: (SSD Internal Reserved) 155 234: (SSD Internal Reserved) 169 241: (SSD Lifetime writes from host) lifetime writes 169 242: (SSD Lifetime reads from host) lifetime reads 137 I'm puzzled by "Life Remaining 100%". From all I've read here (and I think in the XP 'group too), I understood that SSDs had a definite and finite life, in terms of numbers of writes - and, even if they might actually last longer in practice, had a built-in counter that counted down as you used them, and eventually suddenly declares them read-only. With that (probably mis-!)understanding, I wasn't expecting to see a 100% remaining one. (And are values 241 and 242 above given with some indication of what proportion of the total allowable they are?) Yes, a MLC SSD has to ability to write to every cell generally speaking 10,000 times. So say that SSD is a 120GB SSD. That means you can write 120GB x 10000 = 1,200,000GB or 1200TB. In practice it isn't quite that simple due to wear leveling, trim, and all. But it does give you a ballpark figure. So why is it stating 100% life remaining? Well the real number is probably something like 99.99999% and it is rounded to 100%. It will probably stay there until it hits less than 99.5%. Then it probably will report 99%. I am not sure what lifetime writes (241) and lifetime reads (242) are reporting. But lifetime writes will no doubt go up and at some point and the life remaining will drop to 99%. So I will know it when it happens. This machine has the same make and model SSD and lifetime writes reports 150 and lifetime reads reports 67. Both are about a month old so far. I have three more of these SSD unopened to keep in stock until I need them. I'll probably order 3 every month or so until I have enough to start rotating them. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Kingston 120GB SSD - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2 Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2 |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
On Wed, 28 May 2014 19:15:52 -0500, BillW50 wrote:
I have three more of these SSD unopened to keep in stock until I need them. I'll probably order 3 every month or so until I have enough to start rotating them. I thought SSD's were non-rotating drives... (Bad joke. Don't laugh, just groan.) -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
On 29/05/2014 04:33, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2014 19:15:52 -0500, BillW50 wrote: I have three more of these SSD unopened to keep in stock until I need them. I'll probably order 3 every month or so until I have enough to start rotating them. I thought SSD's were non-rotating drives... (Bad joke. Don't laugh, just groan.) SSD? Bill into SSD and using XP? Now this is news to me. -- Good Guy Website: http://mytaxsite.co.uk Website: http://html-css.co.uk Email: http://mytaxsite.co.uk/contact-us |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
On 5/28/2014 6:27 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[] In , AlDrake typed: [] Yes, I like the speed too. I think it's not beneficial to keep an HDD installed as it's powered and produces heat. The only system I have any in is my InWin BUC666 http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=CA-017-IW that has side access though a locked door. [] Side access is good - but what purpose does the lock serve? If someone's going to steal them, they'll either take the whole computer, or wrench off the door thus damaging the case if it's locked? Actually I think the lock prevents the door from falling off. An easy way to close it without a knob sticking out. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Acronis True Image 2014 Premium
On 5/28/2014 10:40 PM, Good Guy wrote:
On 29/05/2014 04:33, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Wed, 28 May 2014 19:15:52 -0500, BillW50 wrote: I have three more of these SSD unopened to keep in stock until I need them. I'll probably order 3 every month or so until I have enough to start rotating them. I thought SSD's were non-rotating drives... (Bad joke. Don't laugh, just groan.) SSD? Bill into SSD and using XP? Now this is news to me. You think Bill only runs one OS? -- Bill Dell Latitude Slate Tablet 128GB SSD ('12 era) - Thunderbird v24.4.0 Intel Atom Z670 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM - Windows 7 Pro SP1 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|