Difference between revisions of "COMP 3000 Essay 1 2010 Question 10"
(Created page with '=Question= How do the constraints of flash storage affect the design of flash-optimized file systems? Explain by contrasting with hard disk-based file systems. =Answer=') |
(→Answer) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
How do the constraints of flash storage affect the design of flash-optimized file systems? Explain by contrasting with hard disk-based file systems. | How do the constraints of flash storage affect the design of flash-optimized file systems? Explain by contrasting with hard disk-based file systems. | ||
Hey guys, | |||
This is what I've got so far... mostly based on wikipedia: | |||
Flash memory has two limitations: it can only be erased in blocks and and it wears out after a certain number of erase cycles. Furthermore, a particular kind of Flash memory (NAND) is not able to provide random access. | |||
As a result of these Flash based file-systems cannot be handled in the same way as disk-based file systems. Here are a few of the key differences: | |||
- Because memory must be erased in blocks, its erasure tends to take up time. Consequently, it is necessary to time the erasures in a way so as not to interfere with the efficiency of the system’s other operations. This is is not a real concern with disk-based file-systems. | |||
- A disk file-system needs to minimize the seeking time, but Flash file-system does not concern itself with this as it doesn’t have a disk. | |||
- A flash system tries to distribute memory in such a way so as not to make a particular block of memory subject to a disproportionally large number of erasures. The purpose of this is to keep the block from wearing out prematurely. The result of it is that memory needs to be distributed differently than in a disk based file-system. | |||
Log-sturctured file systems are thus best suited to dealing with flash memory (they apparently do all of the above things). | |||
For the essay form, I'm thinking of doing a section about traditional hard-disk systems, another about flash-memory and a third about flash systems. At this point, I am imagining the thesis as something like, "Flash systems require a fundamentally different system architecture than disk-based systems due to their need to adapt to the constraints inherent in flash memory: specifically, due to that memory's limited life-span and block-based erasures." The argument would then talk about how these two differences directly lead to a new FS approach. | |||
That's how I see it at the moment. Honestly, I don't like doing research about this kind of stuff, so my data isn't very deep. That said, if you guys could find more info and summarize it, I'm pretty sure that I could synthesize it all into a coherent essay. | |||
Fedor | |||
Revision as of 10:24, 7 October 2010
Question
How do the constraints of flash storage affect the design of flash-optimized file systems? Explain by contrasting with hard disk-based file systems.
Hey guys,
This is what I've got so far... mostly based on wikipedia:
Flash memory has two limitations: it can only be erased in blocks and and it wears out after a certain number of erase cycles. Furthermore, a particular kind of Flash memory (NAND) is not able to provide random access. As a result of these Flash based file-systems cannot be handled in the same way as disk-based file systems. Here are a few of the key differences:
- Because memory must be erased in blocks, its erasure tends to take up time. Consequently, it is necessary to time the erasures in a way so as not to interfere with the efficiency of the system’s other operations. This is is not a real concern with disk-based file-systems. - A disk file-system needs to minimize the seeking time, but Flash file-system does not concern itself with this as it doesn’t have a disk. - A flash system tries to distribute memory in such a way so as not to make a particular block of memory subject to a disproportionally large number of erasures. The purpose of this is to keep the block from wearing out prematurely. The result of it is that memory needs to be distributed differently than in a disk based file-system. Log-sturctured file systems are thus best suited to dealing with flash memory (they apparently do all of the above things).
For the essay form, I'm thinking of doing a section about traditional hard-disk systems, another about flash-memory and a third about flash systems. At this point, I am imagining the thesis as something like, "Flash systems require a fundamentally different system architecture than disk-based systems due to their need to adapt to the constraints inherent in flash memory: specifically, due to that memory's limited life-span and block-based erasures." The argument would then talk about how these two differences directly lead to a new FS approach.
That's how I see it at the moment. Honestly, I don't like doing research about this kind of stuff, so my data isn't very deep. That said, if you guys could find more info and summarize it, I'm pretty sure that I could synthesize it all into a coherent essay.
Fedor