SSD for Archival Storage and Reading

I use massive sound libraries which require fast random access and read speeds. Writing is required to just put the data on the disk and occasional additions or edits, so a relatively rare occurrence. so other than the cost, SSD seems like the perfect medium for this. I have a few questions:

1. If you mostly read massive amounts of data from an SSD is there really less wear and tear on the drive even if heat is generated by constant reading? The assumption is yes, but is it really so?

2. What can fail in an SSD outside of the NAND? There is much talk about how many reads and writes will eventually result in the drive no longer being written to, but how robust is the rest of the package?

3. Can an entire drive be put in read-only mode so that an OS simply cannot write data to it?

4. Why is there no Random Read performance chart for small files and large files in Tom's SSD Charts?

I'm keeping a close eye on random read stats but they aren't always easy to find. I see some cheaper drives with better read than write performance which for this purpose might also be fine as long as the random read performance excels. I'd love to see some cheaper SSD designed for archival reading: slow writes, great read performance. Thanks for any insights.
3 answers Last reply
More about archival storage reading
  1. Have you considered 10k rpm HDD? Even 15k HDD.
    The heat should not an issue if the SSD is in a vented area. Not much else could fail in an SSD. Depends on the manufacturer's choice of hardware. Better hardware usually means enterprise class drives, some manufacturers offer those, but at a premium.
    To put in read-only: right-click on the drive> Properties>security> check DENY where it says Write on the list of Permissions.
  2. Thanks house70. Using enterprise grade HD's is a good idea and some of mine are. As for noise and heat, that's not really a problem because my systems are in a separate room. But no matter the speed, HD's can't beat random read speed and throughput on SSD's unless you're talking fiber networks and multi-disk arrays. This older chart spells it out.

    SSD's would free me of the inherent latency of hard drives making my systems more responsive. and since I'd be reading from them 99% of the time, technically they should last much longer than any HD. I just wish I didn't have to dig as much for random read stats: there's a lot of variation in this department, although some of the Intels have less attractive write speeds but excellent RR speeds, so they might be a good deal. Price is still the main issue with SSD: I need close to 1T to cover my needs.
  3. Correct, price right now is prohibitive for SSDs, as capacity goes up so does the price. 1TB will drive the price to about 3000USD for an SSD and even more than 4000USD for a PCI express-SSD, like the one from OCZ.
    Limiting the writes on it - see my comment above - should ensure that the SSD life is used to the max.
    It all comes down to how much you want to invest in it. Good luck and hope this info helped.
Ask a new question

Read More

SSD Storage