Il giorno mer, 27/11/2019 alle 11.21 +1100, Finn Thain ha scritto:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Andrea Vai wrote:
>
> > Then I started another set of 100 trials and let them run tonight,
> and
> > the first 10 trials were around 1000s, then gradually decreased
> to
> > ~300s, and finally settled around 200s with some trials below 70-
> 80s.
> > This to say, times are extremely variable and for the first time
> I
> > noticed a sort of "performance increase" with time.
> >
>
> The sheer volume of testing (probably some terabytes by now) would
> exercise the wear leveling algorithm in the FTL.
>
> This in itself seems unlikely to improve performance significantly.
> But if
> the flash memory came from a bad batch, perhaps it would have that
> effect.
>
> To find out, someone may need to source another (genuine) Kingston
> DataTraveller device.
I own another device (let's refer to it as "black odd"), identical to
the "slow" one (call it "black even"), and used it as well to do the
tests, especially in the beginning of this story, because I suspected
the problem could be related to a faulty pen drive. At a certain time
I realized that the tests I performed didn't show any difference
between the two flash drives, so since that time I kept using just the
"black even". They were bought together, so of course both of them
probably belong to the same "maybe-bad batch".
But I have another Kingston DataTraveler ("White"), externally
slightly different from the other twos (it's white instead of black,
and labeled G4 instead of G3), though lsusb shows the same IDs:
0951:1666. It had been purchased some months after the other twos
(well, actually, it may be the result of an RMA exchange).
I have just ran one test on this White one, with the new (patched)
kernel, and it took an average of 200seconds (st.dev=46s), which is
not "good", but less "bad" than the real "bad" case of the "black"
ones (>1000 seconds).
I have also tried the "WHITE" one with the old fast kernel, and the
behavior is almost the same as with the new kernel, though a little
bit better (mean=173; st.dev.=11).
Feel free to let me know if I should do other tries,
thanks,
Andrea
