I have seen that SSD storage needs electricity, in order to not lose data, so: If a Linux system with an UPS, that works as a NAS that runs 24/7 existed, and the data would be only written 1-10 times, the “full” capacity of the each physical drive, so TBW wouldn’t be an issue, with, a Raid 1 consisting of 4 drives used for 4k videos, and after a few years for 8k videos, would It be better to use SSDs or HDDs for this purpose with unlimited money and wanting a “no need to modify me for an eternity system”? With equal parts, would the HDDs system be more or less reliable than the SSDs system?

    • HTWingNut@alien.topBEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      Right, but that chart is OLD and talks nothing of modern processes. SLC, MLC are much less susceptible to loss of data because of only 2 or 4 voltage charge states per cell. Looking at QLC especially with 16 different voltage states per cell, just a small voltage loss would mean data corruption.

      This is likely more concerning for well worn SSD’s however, and not for a reasonably fresh one.

    • dev_all_the_ops@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      That article is confusing. They claim you don’t need to worry, then they drop a sentence like this.

      Even a worn-out SSD would still go a year without data loss, according to the original presentation, and that’s while being stored at 87 degrees Fahreneit the entire time

      So which is it? If I have a SSD in a drawer I sure hope it will last more than 1 year.