I am guessing that when formatting disk drives, whether they are
spinning rust, SSD or USB memory sticks ... most people check the "quick Format" box and let the machine get on with it (Windows 11 in this case)
Just out of curiosity, I put a 2TB USB 3.0 memory stick in my machine yesterday, and asked it to do a NTFS "non-quick" format.
Its now been going for about 18 hours - and its somewhere between a
quarter and a third of the way through. The little bar graph thing is updating, so I am fairly sure its not actually frozen.
Is this anything remotely like normal ? - or do people simply never do
this ?
I put a 2TB USB 3.0 memory stick in my machine yesterday, and asked it
to do a NTFS "non-quick" format.
Its now been going for about 18 hours - and its somewhere between a
quarter and a third of the way through. The little bar graph thing is updating, so I am fairly sure its not actually frozen.
Is this anything remotely like normal ?
or do people simply never do this ?
On 17/04/2024 in message <uvod3t$1j73s$1@dont-email.me> Abandoned
Trolley wrote:
I am guessing that when formatting disk drives, whether they are
spinning rust, SSD or USB memory sticks ... most people check the
"quick Format" box and let the machine get on with it (Windows 11 in
this case)
Just out of curiosity, I put a 2TB USB 3.0 memory stick in my machine
yesterday, and asked it to do a NTFS "non-quick" format.
Its now been going for about 18 hours - and its somewhere between a
quarter and a third of the way through. The little bar graph thing is
updating, so I am fairly sure its not actually frozen.
Is this anything remotely like normal ? - or do people simply never do
this ?
Wasn't it the only option for a Windows install once upon a time?
I am guessing that when formatting disk drives, whether they are spinning >rust, SSD or USB memory sticks ... most people check the "quick Format"
box and let the machine get on with it (Windows 11 in this case)
Just out of curiosity, I put a 2TB USB 3.0 memory stick in my machine >yesterday, and asked it to do a NTFS "non-quick" format.
Its now been going for about 18 hours - and its somewhere between a
quarter and a third of the way through. The little bar graph thing is >updating, so I am fairly sure its not actually frozen.
Is this anything remotely like normal ? - or do people simply never do
this ?
I am guessing that when formatting disk drives, whether they are
spinning rust, SSD or USB memory sticks ... most people check the "quick Format" box and let the machine get on with it (Windows 11 in this case)
I'll normaly use a SMART monitor (currently HDTune)
In article <uvod3t$1j73s$1@dont-email.me>, Abandoned Trolley wrote...
I am guessing that when formatting disk drives, whether they are
spinning rust, SSD or USB memory sticks ... most people check the "quick Format" box and let the machine get on with it (Windows 11 in this case)
I'll usually do a full format of a new disk. As I understand it, a quick format simply installs the filesystem (most of it empty). A full format also does a surface integrity check, which might involve (hidden) re-mapping of any
bad sectors which are found.
For SSD it is actually counterproductive for a new drive because it it eats one of your limited flash write cycles. A random 1TB SSD has 240TBW, meaning you can write the whole drive 240 times before it dies. If you do a full format you now only have 239.
Theo
For SSD it is actually counterproductive for a new drive because it it eats one of your limited flash write cycles. A random 1TB SSD has 240TBW, meaning
you can write the whole drive 240 times before it dies. If you do a full format you now only have 239.
Theo
so ... the regular reading and writing of swap files in virtual memory systems is destroying SSDs all over the place ?
For SSD it is actually counterproductive for a new drive because it it eats >> one of your limited flash write cycles. A random 1TB SSD has 240TBW, meaning >> you can write the whole drive 240 times before it dies. If you do a full
format you now only have 239.
Theo
so ... the regular reading and writing of swap files in virtual memory systems is destroying SSDs all over the place ?
Abandoned Trolley <fred@fred-smith.co.uk> wrote:
For SSD it is actually counterproductive for a new drive because it
it eats one of your limited flash write cycles. A random 1TB SSD has
240TBW, meaning you can write the whole drive 240 times before it
dies. If you do a full format you now only have 239.
Theo
so ... the regular reading and writing of swap files in virtual memory
systems is destroying SSDs all over the place ?
Yes, writing is causing wear. But if the SSD has 240TBW and your device
has 8GB RAM, you'd need to write the whole RAM contents 30,000 times.
If you are swapping 1GB it would be 240,000 times, etc. So it depends
how much you are writing out and how frequently. Bearing in mind that
for many SSDs writing 1GB would take a full second or thereabouts, most swapping is going to be much smaller writes.
For those kind of machines one option is just to buy SSDs with more
write cycles. Cheap consumer SSDs have a lot fewer cycles than more enterprise-y ones.
But better to fit more RAM if you can.
Theo
Back in the spinning rust days you would allocated a small partition as
SWAP.
You might even position it on the disc to have the potential fastest
access time for seeks.
With SSDs blocks are allocated on a virtual rather than physical layout so
a 10 GB SWAP space will not be continuously reusing contiguous blocks over
a small area of the SSD.
Yes to more RAM.
I think.
Cheers
Dave R
Back in the spinning rust days you would allocated a small partition as
SWAP.
You might even position it on the disc to have the potential fastest
access time for seeks.
With SSDs blocks are allocated on a virtual rather than physical layout
so a 10 GB SWAP space will not be continuously reusing contiguous
blocks over a small area of the SSD.
Yes to more RAM.
I think.
I have done a number of Solaris installs on SPARC systems, and tailored
the swap partition according to the memory - but I cant remember setting
up any swap partition on any Windows system.
I dont think too many people mess around with that sort of thing - but I guess theres nothing preventing it on spinning rust systems
With SSDs blocks are allocated on a virtual rather than physical layout so
a 10 GB SWAP space will not be continuously reusing contiguous blocks over
a small area of the SSD.
With SSDs blocks are allocated on a virtual rather than physical layout so
a 10 GB SWAP space will not be continuously reusing contiguous blocks over
a small area of the SSD.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 416 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 83:54:36 |
Calls: | 8,739 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 13,282 |
Messages: | 5,961,351 |