On 9/8/21 12:35 AM, this is what Paul wrote:
> A while back, Rene bought a "USB multimeter". It's
> a device with a colorful display, about the size of
> your thumb or so, and it has "volts" and "amps" on
> the display. The device has a male and a female USB
> on it. It sits "in-line" with a peripheral. You would
> plug your USB stick into the meter, then plug the
> meter into the PC USB socket. The meter does not "register"
> on the USB bus, and it's there just to monitor the power.

Ironic that an article on my How-to-Geek newsletter had a review of just such a device.

https://www.reviewgeek.com/95690/plugable-usb-c-vameter-review-easy-plug-and-play-diagnostics/
--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 09:27:58 -0500, Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>On 2021-09-08 8:41 a.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 08/09/2021 15.21, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 at 15:05:30, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid>
>>> wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>>>> On 08/09/2021 14.54, Chris wrote:
>>> []
>>>>> guarantee of quality and can fail at any time. If these files are
>>>>> important to you, you should back them up with the rest of your
>>>>> important data.
>>>>
>>>> And not on an USB stick...
>>> []
>>> Yes, like the CD-RW discs of yore, I consider USB sticks as something to
>>> be used for sneakernet purposes only (i. e. transferring files from one
>>> computer to another). If I was in the PC service business, I might keep
>>> utilities - and other files - on them for convenience, but not rely on
>>> them for long-term storage.
>>>
>>> (What _is_ good for that? Well, if it wasn't for the changes in
>>> interface [PATA to SATA], I'd say spinning hard disc (unplugged, so not
>>> spinning; I say that to distinguish from SSDs) - SSDs maybe, but for me
>>> seriously long-term I'm not so sure, the technology's not been around
>>> long enough yet. [I've never played with tape drives.] Punched tape
>>> [plastic rather than paper] is good but rather bulky!)
>>
>> Tape drives are used professionally, and they are horribly expensive.
>> LTO-9 takes 18TB raw.
>>
>> I use external disks. Either packaged in an USB enclosure, or with an
>> USB external caddy, which allows switching "raw" disks easily.
>>
>
>When I bought my first PC, Dell Dimension XPS 1000 it came with an HP
>Colorado T1000 Travan tape drive, A pack of 5 400 MB tapes cost about
>$175.00 cdn, terribly expensive I only ever bought 1 pacthe drive was
>horribly slowe, It was tied to the secoond connector on the Floppy
>cable, but back then (1995) it was pretty wonderful, and did have a very
>pleasant varying pitched whine when operating. :-)
>
>https://www.cnet.com/products/hp-colorado-t1000-tape-drive-travan-floppy-series/

For my first home computer, I bought an internal tape drive unit as a
backup device. The tapes were 80 MB.

Yes, 80 MEGA Bytes.

My current box has a 3 TB drive. I do not use that tape drive as a
back-up solution. :)

I don't even use it to back up my MacBook with its 400 GB drive
though I possibly could afford the tapes for that. :)

My first PC came with a 250MB drive and a CDROM writer so a secondary
back-up device with 80 MB seemed like a nice addition. Four tapes for
a weekly full back-up and maybe three sets of rotating stores didn't
seem like too much of an expense at the time.

Thirty thousand odd tapes per back-up series *does* seem like too
much work. Maybe too much shelving, too.

I think that might even outweigh my books.

J.

>
>Rene

On 9/8/2021 7:12 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 at 05:23:49, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote (my
> responses usually follow points raised):
> [snip]
>>>>>> Your Name wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease its
>>>>>>> life?
> [snip]
>> These are "write related failures". If the OP is doing
>> "read mostly", and leaving the stick plugged in, it probably
>> is not wearing on the device.
>>
>> The older papers on Flash, described a read-related wear
>> phenomenon. But if that exists today, it gets hardly
>> any press coverage at all, and is certainly not mentioned
>> in any warranty descriptions.
>>
>>   Paul
>
> More or less what I was going to say: wear caused by reading is
> little-publicised and probably low, so if most of the activity is
> reading, I'd leave it plugged in. Because IME the connectors have a
> depressingly low lifetime in terms of numbers of insertions/deletions
> before they become unreliable. Not so much on the device - they're
> easily enough replaced - but on the computer or whatever. (Two or three
> of the three on my laptop now need careful nursing.)

So to summarize: If the drive isn't being used, leave it plugged in. If
it's written frequently don't. Remove it between writes and increase the
number of insertions and removals. My original comment that has been
snipped merely noted that use indeed does cause ware.

I think that merely leaving it plugged in causes virtually no ware*. The
writes cause ware and maybe the reads do a little too. But so what?
That's exactly what you bought to thumb do do. Leave it plugged in and
copy/replace at the first sign of trouble or on a timer.

* The ware caused by leaving it plugged in is minimal. Example, the host
awakes from sleep and re"enumerates" devices.
--
Jeff Barnett

Your Name wrote:

>> If these files are important to you, you should back them up with the
>> rest of your important data.
>
> They ARE the backup.

Ideally, you want a storage technology which makes
device health visible.

USB Flash sticks don't tend to have that. When you go to
use the stick one day, and the bandwidth has dropped to
1.5MB/sec, it's generally too late, and you'll find sections
of the device mostly inaccessible, and other parts read
out at the slow rate. (That's what happened to me, twice
or three times now.)

Devices with S.M.A.R.T reporting capability, are better
than nothing.

SMART is native on SATA and IDE. If you had an ESATA cable
out the back of the PC, that is just SATA in disguise and
has SMART too.

An ESATA cable is 2 meters max, and might not reach your desk
from the floor. The ESATA electrical interface is nothing but
a pain in the ass (the +12V only versus +5V only issue,
hard to tell by looking at the four different connectors,
what kind of capability you hold in your hand, connector
scheme was *NOT* designed by SATAIO committee).

SMART passthru exists, but is mysterious.

https://www.smartmontools.org/wiki/Supported_USB-Devices

TRIM passthru is mysterious too.

https://superuser.com/questions/1456893/trim-support-on-an-usb-attached-ssd

I just tested the ASMedia - ASM225CM in my USB3S2SAT3CB
and neither function works. (That is a USB3 to SATA adapter,
similar to an enclosure for a drive.)

Test with HDTune - No SMART
Test with Optimize - No TRIM

That's an example of me being pissed, at buying
the wrong thing. Now I can't leave that hanging
out the back of the PC, because I don't have the
desirable controls for management.

Only a SATA SSD inside the PC, gives me easy access.
All functions work then. If I use Optimize, it does
a TRIM. If I use HDTune, the table of SMART parameters
is present (and utilities other than HDTune will properly
label the table). HDTune freebie is ten years old, and
for SSD work, you need to use the Toolkit with the
SSD you buy. This is why evaluating the Toolkit,
finding an online review, is just as important as
snapping up a cheap SSD.

The purpose of my missive here, is to make sure you
realize that "visibility" is important, and USB
devices are the kings of "dying and leaving
nothing behind". There goes your backup. Try
to select storage which is monitored.

Paul

On Thu, 9 Sep 2021 03:34:21 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

>On 2021-09-08 14:16:36 +0000, Chris said:
>> Running any kind of storage at full capacity is a bad idea. It'll affect
>> reliability and/or performance.
>
>It's a living archive.

That's a mistake.

>
>It didn't start at near capacity.

They *never* do.

>That happened over time.

It *always* does.

>
>It was a race.
>As the archives got bigger so did the USB thumbdrives to keep up with them.

And that's the way the cosmos ends. Not with a bang but with a
whimper as the sheer weight of information overloads *everything* in
the Universe.

There was a short SF story about this. The Galactic Library's index
to the index to the index was filling the planet and Something Needed
To Be Done. I don't remember the resolution but I can see me going
that way. :)

>
>> If it is the backup, why are you reading from it?
>
>It's a living archive of software & documents.
>The result of multiple machines over multiple years.

The end result of which is *always* a ruddy great super-massive
singularity swallowing up galaxies.

>
>Not this latest thumbdrive but the backup itself is that result.
>Over time, the thumbdrives got bigger and bigger to fit the archive.

They *always* will.

There is no end to data. Have a look at Google's collection someday.

>
>It's cumulative.

Yep.

>Historical.

Yep.

>Meant to be useful.

Yep.

And I still probably have instructions on how to repair Winsock
errors.

>
>It's not just a one-way backup.

Them are the *worst* sort.

>It's a two-way living archive.

A suggestion? Two copies, one live on a stick and one dead on optical
discs; with the discs never being re-written.

Take a "dir" of the discs after writing them full and collect the
"dir" results as index files so you can find stuff.

Also, perhaps think of HTML-ing the accumulated archive on the stick
so you can see it as a web-site?

There are programs that will create a web-page to interface an
archive of files.

Though I'm far too lazy to go look for them.

J.

Corvid wrote:
> On 9/7/21 7:49 PM, John Doe wrote:
>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease
>>> its life?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> I've been keeping the Macrium Reflect backup drive plugged in.
>>
>> Longevity never occurred to me.
>
> Forty years ago, at an aviation school in Waco, TX, some A&P students
> were crouched under a DC3 to work on the landing gear. It never occurred
> to them that after they undid the wrong fastener, they would be crushed.

I generally unplug the backup drive, to cover off
some failure cases. The backup drive is only
connected when doing the backup.

Paul

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> On 2021-09-08 14:16:36 +0000, Chris said:
>> Running any kind of storage at full capacity is a bad idea. It'll affect
>> reliability and/or performance.
>
> It's a living archive.
>
> It didn't start at near capacity.
> That happened over time.

That's the nature of things.

> It was a race.
> As the archives got bigger so did the USB thumbdrives to keep up with them.

Looks like you're going to need to get a bigger one. I would suggest an
external hard drive (or SSD) rather than a USB stick.

>> If it is the backup, why are you reading from it?
>
> It's a living archive of software & documents.
> The result of multiple machines over multiple years.

Then it's not a backup.

I'd suggest you re-partition your internal HDD with one partition
containing your living archive or just add a second disk- this has benefits
its terms of speed and reliability - then have a USB drive for backup.

> Not this latest thumbdrive but the backup itself is that result.
> Over time, the thumbdrives got bigger and bigger to fit the archive.
>
> It's cumulative.
> Historical.
> Meant to be useful.
>
> It's not just a one-way backup.
> It's a two-way living archive.

It's neither. It's your working directory.

Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> wrote:

> John Doe wrote:
>> Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> Your Name wrote:
>>
>>>>> Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease its
>>>>> life?
>>>>
>>>> If you are not accessing it at all, and the thing is not warm, then it
>>>> shouldn't impact its life. But why would you have it plugged
>>>> permanently?
>>>
>>> Many routers allow a USB device to be plugged into them: thumbs, hard
>>> drives, printers, etc. These devices can be accessed by any machine on
>>> the LAN. A thumb drive provides an inexpensive and relatively safe way
>>> to share small amounts of data.
>>
>> My 3D printer uses a USB flash drive for primary storage. It must be
>> plugged in for storing model files (transferred via Wi-Fi). Very useful,
>> remains plugged in. A solid-state drive should last forever anyway. The
>> user's need for occasional or frequent use dictates, not concern for wear
>> and tear on the flash drive.

> Not quite true. Solid state drives do wear out with use.

That's not the question.

The question is "Should I remove the flash drive after each use out of
concern that leaving it plugged in will cause it to prematurely fail."
Not "Should my flash drive be used less frequently?"

I wouldn't worry about it. They are cheap. They are easy to copy.

A weird nym-shifting troll, usually "Corvid" (also "Charger Boy", see sci.electronics.repair)...

see also...
=?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=b6rvid?= <bl@ckbirds.org>
=?UTF-8?B?8J+QriBDb3dzIGFyZSBOaWNlIPCfkK4=?= <nice@cows.moo>
Banders <snap@mailchute.com>
Covid-19 <always.look@message.header>
Corvid <bl@ckbirds.net>
Corvid <bl@ckbirds.org>
Cows Are Nice <cows@nice.moo>
Cows are nice <moo@cows.org>
Cows are Nice <nice@cows.moo>
dogs <dogs@home.com>
Edward H. <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Great Pumpkin <pumpkin@patch.net>
Jose Curvo <jcurvo@mymail.com>
Local Favorite <how2recycle@palomar.info>
Peter Weiner <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Sea <freshness@coast.org>
Standard Poodle <standard@poodle.com>
triangles <build@home.com>
and others...

--
Corvid <bl@ckbirds.net> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!xUOiStaTX9GQDNXPji0+sg.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: Corvid <bl@ckbirds.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10
> Subject: Re: Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease its life?
> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 07:50:21 -0700
> Organization: The 27 Club
> Message-ID: <shaije$1ni7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
> References: <sh8lgd$1q8p$1@gioia.aioe.org> <sh98c7$o4d$2@dont-email.me>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="56903"; posting-host="xUOiStaTX9GQDNXPji0+sg.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
> Content-Language: en-US
> X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org alt.comp.os.windows-10:153238
>
> On 9/7/21 7:49 PM, John Doe wrote:
>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease
>>> its life?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> I've been keeping the Macrium Reflect backup drive plugged in.
>>
>> Longevity never occurred to me.
>
> Forty years ago, at an aviation school in Waco, TX, some A&P students
> were crouched under a DC3 to work on the landing gear. It never occurred
> to them that after they undid the wrong fastener, they would be crushed.
>
>

John Doe wrote:
> Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> wrote:
>
>> John Doe wrote:
>>> Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>>> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>> Your Name wrote:
>>>>>> Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease its
>>>>>> life?
>>>>> If you are not accessing it at all, and the thing is not warm, then it
>>>>> shouldn't impact its life. But why would you have it plugged
>>>>> permanently?
>>>> Many routers allow a USB device to be plugged into them: thumbs, hard
>>>> drives, printers, etc. These devices can be accessed by any machine on
>>>> the LAN. A thumb drive provides an inexpensive and relatively safe way
>>>> to share small amounts of data.
>>> My 3D printer uses a USB flash drive for primary storage. It must be
>>> plugged in for storing model files (transferred via Wi-Fi). Very useful,
>>> remains plugged in. A solid-state drive should last forever anyway. The
>>> user's need for occasional or frequent use dictates, not concern for wear
>>> and tear on the flash drive.
>
>> Not quite true. Solid state drives do wear out with use.
>
> That's not the question.
>
> The question is "Should I remove the flash drive after each use out of
> concern that leaving it plugged in will cause it to prematurely fail."
> Not "Should my flash drive be used less frequently?"
>
> I wouldn't worry about it. They are cheap. They are easy to copy.

It's not the cheapness that's the issue.

It's the danger a user places their only copy of
a file on it, the stick dies and the file is lost.

Having a USB stick plugged in all the time, encourages
bad habits :-) It's like an invitation to sin.

Anything you use for primary storage, should have
SMART capability, so you get some warning that the
storage device is failing. USB sticks can just drop
dead on you, and they don't have SMART.

If you have the SMART Warning enabled in the BIOS,
at POST time the machine can warn you that one of
your drives is in bad shape. That's for people who
would otherwise, never check the SMART table. There
are plenty of people, who only "get excited" when
the drive makes clicking noises. And then it could
be damn close to being too late.

And SSDs don't make clicking noises, and unless you
have SMART turned on, you might miss a very important
warning. (The Intel one, that your Intel SSD drive is about
to brick because the wear life is up. That's an example
of one you must not ignore.)

Paul

On 9/7/21 2:27 PM, Your Name wrote:
> Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease its life?

Probably (watch the weasel word) not.

But you do astronomically increase your chances of
getting it infected with ransomware.

On Thu, 9 Sep 2021 at 00:33:45, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote (my
responses usually follow points raised):
[]
>And SSDs don't make clicking noises, and unless you
>have SMART turned on, you might miss a very important
>warning. (The Intel one, that your Intel SSD drive is about
>to brick because the wear life is up. That's an example
>of one you must not ignore.)
>
> Paul

Does that still apply to all Intel SS drives, or only one series? If
the latter, are many people likely to be still using them?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Wisdom is the ability to cope. - the late (AB of C) Michael Ramsey,
quoted by Stephen Fry (RT 24-30 August 2013)

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Sep 2021 at 00:33:45, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote (my
> responses usually follow points raised):
> []
>> And SSDs don't make clicking noises, and unless you
>> have SMART turned on, you might miss a very important
>> warning. (The Intel one, that your Intel SSD drive is about
>> to brick because the wear life is up. That's an example
>> of one you must not ignore.)
>>
>> Paul
>
> Does that still apply to all Intel SS drives, or only one series? If
> the latter, are many people likely to be still using them?

This is an Intel design decision.

I would expect it to be applied uniformly
to all their designs. As the rationale would
be the same in each case.

Intel does not trust the media, for reading or
writing, once the 3000 cycles are up. Other brands
may continue to allow reading, making it possible to
clone over or, to do a backup image. The Intel
approach is, um, not for the uninitiated. You'd
better know why we do backups, if you're an Intel
SSD customer.

How does Intel treat Optane (a different tech) ? Dunno.

Paul

First the idiot says "it's not the cheapness". Then it talks about there
being only one copy of the file. Flash drives being cheap means they can
easily be duplicated with another cheap flash drive. Eureka!

This is just stupid...

--
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10
> Subject: Re: Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease its life?
> Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2021 00:33:45 -0400
> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
> Lines: 60
> Message-ID: <shc2r8$4e0$1@dont-email.me>
> References: <sh8lgd$1q8p$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2l7l0ixd7j.ln2@minas-tirith.valinor> <sh8tvv$6j2$1@dont-email.me> <sh98ur$o4d$3@dont-email.me> <sh9fg6$ssh$1@dont-email.me> <shc034$kgl$1@dont-email.me>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Injection-Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 04:33:45 -0000 (UTC)
> Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1b89b3cfff8af6b8463f6f58fba2f355"; logging-data="4544"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18/wv0hUWdK3PAogsotwMpnuuc7KHr0NQY="
> User-Agent: Ratcatcher/2.0.0.25 (Windows/20130802)
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:BEiizlGVlbSnCvU98bMFMUsfFN4=
> In-Reply-To: <shc034$kgl$1@dont-email.me>
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org alt.comp.os.windows-10:153281
>
> John Doe wrote:
>> Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> wrote:
>>
>>> John Doe wrote:
>>>> Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>>>> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>> Your Name wrote:
>>>>>>> Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease its
>>>>>>> life?
>>>>>> If you are not accessing it at all, and the thing is not warm, then it
>>>>>> shouldn't impact its life. But why would you have it plugged
>>>>>> permanently?
>>>>> Many routers allow a USB device to be plugged into them: thumbs, hard
>>>>> drives, printers, etc. These devices can be accessed by any machine on
>>>>> the LAN. A thumb drive provides an inexpensive and relatively safe way
>>>>> to share small amounts of data.
>>>> My 3D printer uses a USB flash drive for primary storage. It must be
>>>> plugged in for storing model files (transferred via Wi-Fi). Very useful,
>>>> remains plugged in. A solid-state drive should last forever anyway. The
>>>> user's need for occasional or frequent use dictates, not concern for wear
>>>> and tear on the flash drive.
>>
>>> Not quite true. Solid state drives do wear out with use.
>>
>> That's not the question.
>>
>> The question is "Should I remove the flash drive after each use out of
>> concern that leaving it plugged in will cause it to prematurely fail."
>> Not "Should my flash drive be used less frequently?"
>>
>> I wouldn't worry about it. They are cheap. They are easy to copy.
>
> It's not the cheapness that's the issue.
>
> It's the danger a user places their only copy of
> a file on it, the stick dies and the file is lost.
>
> Having a USB stick plugged in all the time, encourages
> bad habits :-) It's like an invitation to sin.
>
> Anything you use for primary storage, should have
> SMART capability, so you get some warning that the
> storage device is failing. USB sticks can just drop
> dead on you, and they don't have SMART.
>
> If you have the SMART Warning enabled in the BIOS,
> at POST time the machine can warn you that one of
> your drives is in bad shape. That's for people who
> would otherwise, never check the SMART table. There
> are plenty of people, who only "get excited" when
> the drive makes clicking noises. And then it could
> be damn close to being too late.
>
> And SSDs don't make clicking noises, and unless you
> have SMART turned on, you might miss a very important
> warning. (The Intel one, that your Intel SSD drive is about
> to brick because the wear life is up. That's an example
> of one you must not ignore.)
>
> Paul
>
>

9/8/21, 8:46 in the PM, John Doe writes:
> Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> wrote:
>> John Doe wrote:

>>> remains plugged in. A solid-state drive should last forever
>>> anyway. The user's need for occasional or frequent use dictates,
>>> not concern for wear and tear on the flash drive.
>
>> Not quite true. Solid state drives do wear out with use.
>
> That's not the question.

His reply was to YOU. You made it the question with "A solid-state
drive should last forever anyway."

> The question is "Should I remove the flash drive after each use out
> of concern that leaving it plugged in will cause it to prematurely
> fail." Not "Should my flash drive be used less frequently?"

> I wouldn't worry about it.

Because "Longevity never occurred to me."

A weird nym-shifting troll, usually "Corvid" (also "Charger Boy", see sci.electronics.repair)...

see also...
=?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=b6rvid?= <bl@ckbirds.org>
=?UTF-8?B?8J+QriBDb3dzIGFyZSBOaWNlIPCfkK4=?= <nice@cows.moo>
Banders <snap@mailchute.com>
Covid-19 <always.look@message.header>
Corvid <bl@ckbirds.net>
Corvid <bl@ckbirds.org>
Cows Are Nice <cows@nice.moo>
Cows are nice <moo@cows.org>
Cows are Nice <nice@cows.moo>
dogs <dogs@home.com>
Edward H. <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Great Pumpkin <pumpkin@patch.net>
Jose Curvo <jcurvo@mymail.com>
Local Favorite <how2recycle@palomar.info>
Peter Weiner <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Sea <freshness@coast.org>
Standard Poodle <standard@poodle.com>
triangles <build@home.com>
and others...

--
Corvid <bl@ckbirds.net> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!xUOiStaTX9GQDNXPji0+sg.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: Corvid <bl@ckbirds.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10
> Subject: Re: Does leaving my usb thumbdrive in the computer usb port decrease its life?
> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 21:22:41 -0700
> Organization: The 27 Club
> Message-ID: <shemii$656$1@gioia.aioe.org>
> References: <sh8lgd$1q8p$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2l7l0ixd7j.ln2@minas-tirith.valinor> <sh8tvv$6j2$1@dont-email.me> <sh98ur$o4d$3@dont-email.me> <sh9fg6$ssh$1@dont-email.me> <shc034$kgl$1@dont-email.me>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="6310"; posting-host="xUOiStaTX9GQDNXPji0+sg.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
> Content-Language: en-US
> X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org alt.comp.os.windows-10:153355
>
> 9/8/21, 8:46 in the PM, John Doe writes:
>> Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> wrote:
>>> John Doe wrote:
>
>>>> remains plugged in. A solid-state drive should last forever
>>>> anyway. The user's need for occasional or frequent use dictates,
>>>> not concern for wear and tear on the flash drive.
>>
>>> Not quite true. Solid state drives do wear out with use.
>>
>> That's not the question.
>
> His reply was to YOU. You made it the question with "A solid-state
> drive should last forever anyway."
>
>> The question is "Should I remove the flash drive after each use out
>> of concern that leaving it plugged in will cause it to prematurely
>> fail." Not "Should my flash drive be used less frequently?"
>
>> I wouldn't worry about it.
>
> Because "Longevity never occurred to me."
>
>

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/09/2021 04:07, Your Name wrote:
> > On 2021-09-07 23:50:35 +0000, Carlos E. R. said:
> >> I put them in an empty tea tin.
> >
> > I keep files on the usb drive which I access about once a day or two.
>
> How many files and how large? Are you only reading them or writing to
> them as well?
>
> Unless you're writing gigabytes of data per day to it, it should last a
> long time.

Not really relevant in the context of the OP's use, but FWIW just an
anecdotal datapoint:

I don't write gigabytes per day, but 'only' some 500MB to a bit over
1GB and the SD-card (no, not a 'usb thumbdrive', but similar technology)
in my laptop lasts 'forever', it hasn't failed in probably some 5 to 10
years of daily use.

> However, USB sticks are commodity products where there's no
> guarantee of quality and can fail at any time. If these files are
> important to you, you should back them up with the rest of your
> important data.

This *is* actually my backup! :-) But don't worry, it's only the first
level backup in a multi-level backup scheme, with both onsite and
offsite backups.

> > Don't feel like getting on my knees with a flashlight to pull it out.
> > Putting it back in under the desk is even more difficult (takes 3 tries).
>
> You can get extension cables or a hub to make it easier to reach.

Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 08/09/2021 04:07, Your Name wrote:
>>> On 2021-09-07 23:50:35 +0000, Carlos E. R. said:
>>>> I put them in an empty tea tin.
>>> I keep files on the usb drive which I access about once a day or two.
>> How many files and how large? Are you only reading them or writing to
>> them as well?
>>
>> Unless you're writing gigabytes of data per day to it, it should last a
>> long time.
>
> Not really relevant in the context of the OP's use, but FWIW just an
> anecdotal datapoint:
>
> I don't write gigabytes per day, but 'only' some 500MB to a bit over
> 1GB and the SD-card (no, not a 'usb thumbdrive', but similar technology)
> in my laptop lasts 'forever', it hasn't failed in probably some 5 to 10
> years of daily use.
>
>> However, USB sticks are commodity products where there's no
>> guarantee of quality and can fail at any time. If these files are
>> important to you, you should back them up with the rest of your
>> important data.
>
> This *is* actually my backup! :-) But don't worry, it's only the first
> level backup in a multi-level backup scheme, with both onsite and
> offsite backups.
>
>>> Don't feel like getting on my knees with a flashlight to pull it out.
>>> Putting it back in under the desk is even more difficult (takes 3 tries).
>> You can get extension cables or a hub to make it easier to reach.

Since the stick is that old, it's probably MLC flash.

And slightly better than the TLC flash today.

I haven't heard of any USB sticks using QLC flash, but
that could happen at any time. And that would be
awful, without a better controller chip in usage.

I have one MLC flash stick (OCZ Rally2 8GB) and it
has held up quite well. I also have two dead TLC sticks
which received a minimal amount of writes. There seem to be
some differences. As long as the controller chips are
(on average) so awful, let's hope they keep the QLC inside
SSD drives.

There were definitely SLC flash sticks, but the capacity in
bytes is quite limited on those. Micron did make some big SLC
chips, because a Chinese guy tried to sell some, but these
chips have an unclear status on the Micron page. Can't tell
if they're in production or not. I was quite surprised on
seeing that, as I would never figure one of the first tier
companies making a product like that (32GB SLC). There is a
small company that specializes in tiny SLC chips and they aren't
even remotely close to making a 32GB chip.

SLC Best
MLC
TLC <=== Walmart sticks
QLC Worst
xxx <=== five-bit is coming

Paul

On 9/11/21 4:09 PM, Paul wrote:

> I have one MLC flash stick (OCZ Rally2 8GB)

Is my 2GB Rally2 MLC?

>    SLC  Best
>    MLC
>    TLC  <=== Walmart sticks
>    QLC  Worst
>    xxx  <=== five-bit is coming

Corvid wrote:
> On 9/11/21 4:09 PM, Paul wrote:
>
>> I have one MLC flash stick (OCZ Rally2 8GB)
>
> Is my 2GB Rally2 MLC?
>
>> SLC Best
>> MLC
>> TLC <=== Walmart sticks
>> QLC Worst
>> xxx <=== five-bit is coming

It could be two 1GB SLC flash chips,
on a double sided PCB. I don't really know
what the limit of SLC was in the first
generation. Part of the reason the Rally2
used two chips, was they wanted to double
the speed by having two channels. It wasn't
particularly a "play" to make a higher
capacity stick. It would be two channels
of 8MB/sec transfer rate or so.

The Micron 32GB SLC, I've no idea how
that was made. Or whether it's a 128GB TLC
running in SLC mode.

Micron is pretty good at this trickery stuff.
It has made something it calls "Enterprise" flash
memory, which has better write cycle limits.
Don't ask me why this sort of engineering was
"necessary". They wanted product differentiation,
and I guess figured they could squeeze more money
per square inch of silicon that way. The Enterprise
flash is used in the "Chia" SSDs (and no price is
listed for them). One of the Chia SSDs had a
12000 TBW rating (important because Chia farming
beats the piss out of the drive used for the first
stage of the process).

Whereas if they sold big SLC (and it was real SLC
and not fake SLC), it would sell like
hot-cakes. Sticks made of that would last forever.
If it's TLC running in SLC mode, I don't know what
sort of lifespan it would have.

Paul

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
....
> Since the stick is that old, it's probably MLC flash.

> And slightly better than the TLC flash today.

> I haven't heard of any USB sticks using QLC flash, but
> that could happen at any time. And that would be
> awful, without a better controller chip in usage.

> I have one MLC flash stick (OCZ Rally2 8GB) and it
> has held up quite well. I also have two dead TLC sticks
> which received a minimal amount of writes. There seem to be
> some differences. As long as the controller chips are
> (on average) so awful, let's hope they keep the QLC inside
> SSD drives.

> There were definitely SLC flash sticks, but the capacity in
> bytes is quite limited on those. Micron did make some big SLC
> chips, because a Chinese guy tried to sell some, but these
> chips have an unclear status on the Micron page. Can't tell
> if they're in production or not. I was quite surprised on
> seeing that, as I would never figure one of the first tier
> companies making a product like that (32GB SLC). There is a
> small company that specializes in tiny SLC chips and they aren't
> even remotely close to making a 32GB chip.

> SLC Best
> MLC
> TLC <=== Walmart sticks
> QLC Worst
> xxx <=== five-bit is coming

How does one determines which type USB flash sticks use? :/
--
Argh, my old body and life. :(
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

Ant wrote:
> Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
> ...
>> Since the stick is that old, it's probably MLC flash.
>
>> And slightly better than the TLC flash today.
>
>> I haven't heard of any USB sticks using QLC flash, but
>> that could happen at any time. And that would be
>> awful, without a better controller chip in usage.
>
>> I have one MLC flash stick (OCZ Rally2 8GB) and it
>> has held up quite well. I also have two dead TLC sticks
>> which received a minimal amount of writes. There seem to be
>> some differences. As long as the controller chips are
>> (on average) so awful, let's hope they keep the QLC inside
>> SSD drives.
>
>> There were definitely SLC flash sticks, but the capacity in
>> bytes is quite limited on those. Micron did make some big SLC
>> chips, because a Chinese guy tried to sell some, but these
>> chips have an unclear status on the Micron page. Can't tell
>> if they're in production or not. I was quite surprised on
>> seeing that, as I would never figure one of the first tier
>> companies making a product like that (32GB SLC). There is a
>> small company that specializes in tiny SLC chips and they aren't
>> even remotely close to making a 32GB chip.
>
>> SLC Best
>> MLC
>> TLC <=== Walmart sticks
>> QLC Worst
>> xxx <=== five-bit is coming
>
> How does one determines which type USB flash sticks use? :/

Size used to be a hint.

SLC used to stop at maybe 1GB or so. Some adverts today
for (expensive) industrial flash sticks, they're selling
256MB sticks.

TLC start at 16GB or 32GB. A 16GB stick, could be a 32GB
fallout, that half of it is certified to run. (The chip
failed to pass at the 32GB size point, but enough of the
chip passed to be making a 16GB chip from it. The upper half
or the lower half could be pinned off. When you have a
32GB USB stick fail on you, try testing the upper half
and the lower half, and you might find one half is working
better than the other half.)

The MLC would fill the space between those two. An 8GB
stick might be MLC.

The size doesn't have sharp enough boundaries to be
absolutely certain, so it's just a guess at what it
might be. If you had a 256GB USB flash, that's not
SLC or MLC, for sure. Really large sticks must be
something further down the table.

And an article I was reading claimed that "after
five bits per cell, they might stop". Where would the
fun be, in not making ruinously-bad storage materials ?
When the first TLC based SSD drive came out and it
had "mushy" storage, that should have been the indicator
to stop making that table above longer.

Unreliable flash, means adding large ECC protection.
Currently, a 512 byte sector, has 50 additional bytes
of ECC syndrome to protect it. One of the ARM cores in
an SSD, does nothing but fix errored data, using that
syndrome to compute the corrections. That means, to use
an unreliable flash technology, requires the usage of
some of the storage capacity, for ECC instead. That's
an overhead or tax if you will. And such behavior, can
make the SSD drive slow on reads. A 500MB/sec product,
might be seen to be reading at 300MB/sec, if it does
error correction for every sector on the drive. This is
why we don't want five-bit-per-cell memory. It encourages
them to make trash.

Paul