Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #37764

Re: Android 6

Show all headers | View raw

In article <6fc6ac75-2e6c-b09a-d8dd-23b185b02217@arnowelzel.de>, Arno 
Welzel wrote:
>> TRIM was invented to enable the filesystem to communicate 
>> information about deleted/truncated files to the flash controller so 
>> that it could perform wear levelling more effectively and so prolong 
>> the life of the SSD. The importance of TRIM for speed is minor.
> 
> I don't agree. See:
> 
> <http://www.anandtech.com/show/2738>
> <http://www.anandtech.com/show/2738/8>
> <http://www.anandtech.com/show/2738/10>
> 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trim_(computing)>

Those references agree with what I said about what TRIM does, and 
emphasise (I would say over-emphasise) the fact that this will, in 
general, result in faster write times for an SSD that supports TRIM.

My point was that the original impetus for the implementation of TRIM 
had nothing (directly) to do with speed. SSD manufacturers wanted to use 
cheaper forms of flash memory (MLC rather than SLC, for example) and 
smaller flash cells to create high-capacity SSDs at affordable prices, 
but the cheaper and denser forms of flash could not support as many 
erase cycles as the flash memory that was then in use. 

In order to produce large SSDs with acceptable lifetimes while using 
inexpensive flash memory it was necessary to introduce wear levelling 
into the flash controller chips. The better the wear levelling is, the 
longer the SSD will last for a given type of flash memory (or, to put it 
another way, the better the wear levelling is the cheaper the flash 
memory can be for an SSD with a given expected life). TRIM technology 
enables the wear levelling to be more effective because the controller 
has more timely information about flash memory blocks that can be 
erased, and so is a crucial technology for extending the lifetimes of 
flash memory devices.

Yes, TRIM also makes flash devices faster, in general, and this is the 
advantage most evident to the end user. Speed is not the reason that 
TRIM was first introduced, though. That was done to make it possible to 
produce SSDs more cheaply by using cheaper forms of flash without 
compromising the lifetime of the SSDs.

In fact, all SSDs are so stupidly quick compared with spinning rust that 
the speed difference given by TRIM is hardly noticeable. It's not about 
speed it's about cost.

-- 
Cheers,
 Daniel.
 

Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Android 6 Bill <Billaboard@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 17:21 +0000
  Re: Android 6 The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 10:00 -0800
    Re: Android 6 Bill <Billaboard@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 00:23 +0000
      Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-22 19:30 -0500
        Re: Android 6 Bill <Billaboard@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 12:42 +0000
          Re: Android 6 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-12-23 11:58 -0500
            Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-29 13:43 +0100
              Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2016-12-30 15:34 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-30 22:33 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2016-12-31 13:27 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-04 08:59 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-04 13:40 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-11 09:00 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-15 18:23 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-15 21:20 +0100
                Re: Android 6 AL <45364747@invalid.com> - 2017-01-04 10:06 -0700
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-11 09:00 +0100
                Re: Android 6 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-05 01:34 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-07 14:14 +0000
                Re: Android 6 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-07 13:09 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-08 18:18 +0000
                Re: Android 6 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-08 15:42 -0500
                Re: Android 6 The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 17:11 -0800
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-08 20:19 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-09 23:55 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-11 18:07 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-08 21:34 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-09 23:55 +0000
          Re: Android 6 Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2016-12-24 10:49 +0100
  Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-22 23:55 +0100
    Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-22 19:15 -0500
      Re: Android 6 Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2016-12-23 05:46 +0100
        Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-23 00:15 -0500
      Re: Android 6 Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2016-12-23 17:11 +0000
        Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-23 12:43 -0500
          Re: Android 6 Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2016-12-23 21:22 +0000
            Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-24 14:29 -0500
              Re: Android 6 Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2016-12-25 11:10 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> - 2016-12-25 12:37 +0100
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-25 11:18 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2016-12-25 20:28 +0000
          Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-29 12:02 -0500
            Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-29 23:45 +0100
              Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-29 18:02 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-30 22:24 +0100
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-31 11:55 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-04 09:04 +0100
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-04 10:14 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-11 18:11 +0100
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-11 13:05 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-13 17:23 +0100
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-16 15:35 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-17 05:39 +0100
              Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2016-12-30 15:34 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-30 22:26 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2016-12-31 13:27 +0000
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-31 11:55 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-04 09:11 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-04 13:40 +0000
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-04 10:14 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-11 18:12 +0100
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-11 13:05 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-13 17:24 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-15 18:23 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-15 21:30 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-16 15:42 +0000
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-16 15:35 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-17 05:44 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2017-01-17 17:47 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Bill <Billaboard@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 01:05 +0000
                Re: Android 6 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-02 02:08 -0500
                Re: Android 6 David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2017-01-02 08:01 +0000
                Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-02 08:51 -0500
                Re: Android 6 Bill <Billaboard@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 20:41 +0000
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-04 09:18 +0100
                Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2017-01-04 09:14 +0100
          Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-29 14:05 +0100
      Re: Android 6 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-29 12:02 -0500
        Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-29 23:46 +0100
          Re: Android 6 Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2016-12-31 20:18 +0000
      Re: Android 6 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-12-29 13:47 +0100

csiph-web