On 6/9/21 11:30 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > maybe you should read the paper. > > " Thiscomparison demonstrates that using F2FS, a flash-friendly file > sys-tem, does not mitigate the wear-out problem, except inasmuch asit > inadvertently rate limitsallI/O to the device" It seems like my email was not clear enough? What I tried to make clear is that I think that there is no way to solve the flash wear issue with the traditional block interface. I think that F2FS in combination with the zone interface is an effective solution. What is also relevant in this context is that the "Flash drive lifespan is a problem" paper was published in 2017. I think that the first commercial SSDs with a zone interface became available at a later time (summer of 2020?). Bart.
