SourceSSDs were built because there are billions of SATA and SAS disk ports available. Filling some of those ports with SSDs promised to be quite profitable - a promise fulfilled in the last 5 years.
But now that non-volatile memory technology - flash today, plus RRAM tomorrow - has been widely accepted, it is time to build systems that use flash directly instead of through our antique storage stacks. The various efforts to decrease latency - SATA 3, NVMe, and others - still add layers of software between our applications and our data, creating complexity and wasting CPU cycles. A recent PhD thesis got me to thinking about this.
It's not actually "wasting CPU cycles" because CPUs are also constantly evolving to meet the processing demands of new hardware.
I would not call SSDs architecture obsolete but rather "simplified" for better performance.
Thanks for sharing.
They're definitely not antique. Most non tech saavy people would not have heard of SSDs.
This was the best sentence in the article.I'm responsible for any over-simplifications and errors.
Crap I thought the SSD was a good thing, regardless, I still love the quickness over the spinning top.
Sorry Dr. Robin Harris, but you're taking the wrong road.
SSDs all the way !
~update~
For me:
SSDs --> OS / Progs
HDDs --> Mass storage
External Drive --> Backup
He's not saying that solid state storage is obsolete, just the idea that you would access this storage as if it were a spinning hard disk, using the same SATA interfaces used for spinning hard drives. It's much more efficient to use an interface designed explicitly for solid state storage.
Quote
