Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > uk.comp.os.linux > #23719
| From | "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | uk.comp.os.linux |
| Subject | Re: Here we go again |
| Date | 2025-09-08 16:11 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <1757344306@f1.n250.z2.fidonet.ftn> (permalink) |
| References | <1096fcr$dp58$1@dont-email.me> <1098se7$10teb$1@dont-email.me> <1099o24$17t27$1@dont-email.me> <109mcdb$74et$1@dont-email.me> |
Hello Davey! 08 Sep 25 11:50, Davey wrote to all: > <lRh*hRHlA@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> > <1099rhn$18ptm$1@dont-email.me> > <lRh*94HlA@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> > <109bq2b$1lg6g$2@dont-email.me> <109ces1$1sb4s$1@dont-email.me> > Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> wrote: >> On 04/09/2025 11:35, Davey wrote: >> > I am not familiar with all this, but I have identified the >> > following: >> > >> https://cpc.farnell.com/kingston/snv3s-2000g/ssd-nv3-m-2-2280-pcie4- >> 0- >> > nvme/dp/CS37703?st=pcie%20to%20pci for the new SSD. >> > Then a choice: >> > For the SATA-USB adapter, possibly, at £9.78: >> > >> https://cpc.farnell.com/startech/usb3s2sat3cb/lead-sata-to-usb-with- >> >> > uasp/dp/CS34473?st=ssd%20to%20usb%20adapters >> > or at £28.48: >> > >> https://cpc.farnell.com/startech/usb312sat3/adapter-usb3-1-10gb-s-sa >> ta- >> > ssd/dp/CS30219?st=ssd%20to%20usb%20adapters >> > I do not see why there is such a price difference, unless one gets >> > what one pays for. >> >> It's probably that the more expensive adaptor works with 3.5" >> drives, and they have different power requirements. The page you >> linked to does say that a power adaptor is included. 2.5" drives >> (whether SSD or spinning rust) need only 5V. >> > Looking for an M2-USB adapter, I found, for £42.38: >> > >> https://cpc.farnell.com/startech/m2-usb-c-nvme-sata/enclosure-usb-c- >> to-m-2-nvme-sata/dp/CS35447?st=m2%20to%20usb%20adapters >> > which looks as though it would do both jobs (not at the same time, >> > of course). >> >> Both jobs? It'll house your M.2 NVMe drive (and would work with an >> M.2 SATA drive) but won't work with a 2.5" SATA drive. Different >> interface. >> >> Nice that it comes with both USB-A and USB-C cables ... but I'm >> guessing you only need the former? >> >> It looks a little expensive, too. Have a look at: >> >> https://www.scan.co.uk/products/sabrent-ec-snve-usb32-type-c-enclosu >> re-m2-pcie-nvme-sata-ssd-tool-free-10gbps-speeds-plug-and-play-a or >> for that matter: >> https://business.currys.co.uk/catalogue/computing/P219238P which >> is perhaps an older version of the one you found? > OK, this is where I am. I am rapidly thinking that the easiest > solution will be to remove the m2 SSD, which I believe still has the > video files on it. Even if they are lost, they are mostly stored > elsewhere. Then I would re-install the OS as a clean install onto the > original SATA 1TB SSD, knowing that I would lose anything on there. > Maybe not. The only major loss would be the Local Folders saved since > the last Backup. Since my e-mail is via gmail. all messages are still > available the server, and so the missing Local Folders could be > restored, with some work. I have always backed up any altered > documents every night. > Parts of my reasoning are that: > 1. The manufacturer does not offer now a direct 1TB or 2TB SATA SSD. > Buying one from a different source would just add another possible > layer of confusion, as if there were not enough already. It offers > those sizes in HDD, but that would compromise speed. For a replacement > SSD, it offers either 500GB (£59) or 4TB (£324). > 2. One thought is to buy the 500GB SSD, use that for the new install, > grab the 'lost' data, save it elsewhere, and finally return the 1TB > SSD and start again. But would a 500GB drive be big enough? Or > possibly, for this job only, either the 1TB HDD, (£48), or the > 2TB HDD (£71). But then they would sit on the shelf. > 3. The whole process of trying to mount the old SSDs and grabbing the > data from them is an unknown to me, I have not managed to mount > such partitions while booted from a Live USB. Essentially, I am > talking about the Devil I know rather than the Devil I don't. > I can't help feeling that this simpler process would ultimately be > more successful, and faster than attempting to grab the old data. > Hmmm. Remember, I am a Stranger in a Strange Land here. Thoughts? I do use both M.2 and sata SSD units and having tried a.m. other brand (Crucial and found it was too painful to use cleaning using fstrim because of a very poor controller) I switched to a Samsung 990 PRO M.2 unit of 1TB although I wished I had purchased a larger one say 2 - 4 TB. I still run fstrim one per day I am keeping an eye on its o.p to see if I need to change it to 2 times per day at 00:00,12:00 and 40 minutes (my semi-ish quiet time). My system is on 24/7 running bbs, ftp, web servers as well as other services such as Mysql/mariadb server and a mainframe gateway / inteerlink. On line I still do Cobol development for my O/S ACAS accounting system with many manual updates heavy in the mix using LibreOffice writer. There are around a dozen of these, many over 100 A4 pages. This I hope will reduce within the next month or two - there again I have been saying that kind of thing for some years :( Still at 78, I do need something to keep me occupied as flying has gotten way too expensive in the UK at 250 pounds per hour for 60 year old Pipers and Cessnas singles - twins are out of question being on a pension :) It is cheaper to rent time in a B737-8 sim than use one of these well over priced a/c's and I do not have to pay extra for an instructor / 2nd pilot. Vincent
Back to uk.comp.os.linux | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-02 11:03 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-03 08:57 +0100
Re: Here we go again Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-03 16:49 +0100
Re: Here we go again Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-09-03 17:21 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-03 17:48 +0100
Re: Here we go again Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-09-03 18:20 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-03 20:10 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-03 20:50 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-04 11:35 +0100
Re: Here we go again Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-04 17:30 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-04 19:52 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-05 23:49 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-08 11:50 +0100
Re: Here we go again "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2025-09-08 16:11 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-08 17:28 +0100
TRIM (Was: Here we go again) Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-15 16:00 +0100
Re: TRIM (Was: Here we go again) Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-15 17:30 +0100
Re: TRIM Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-17 08:43 +0100
Re: TRIM Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-17 10:30 +0100
Re: TRIM Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-17 11:05 +0100
Re: TRIM Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-17 15:12 +0100
Re: TRIM Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-17 15:54 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-09 09:04 +0100
Re: Here we go again "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2025-09-09 12:19 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-09 18:03 +0100
Re: Here we go again "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2025-09-09 22:02 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-10 00:14 +0100
Re: Here we go again -Update Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-11 17:12 +0100
Re: Here we go again -Update Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-21 16:10 +0100
Re: Here we go again -Update "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 01:41 +0100
Re: Here we go again -Update Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-22 09:29 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-10 12:43 +0100
Re: Here we go again Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-09-08 21:33 +0100
Re: Here we go again Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-04 20:07 +0100
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-05 02:47 +0100
Re: Here we go again Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> - 2025-09-03 23:46 +0000
Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-04 09:36 +0100
Re: Here we go again Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> - 2025-09-03 23:31 +0000
csiph-web