| 1 |
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2012-06-22 11:00 AM, Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Tanstaafl<tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org> |
| 5 |
>> wrote: |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>>> Also, my questions was more just to which cards are considered best/most |
| 8 |
>>> stable - SD or CF... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>> Ultimately they both probably have the same flash chips inside of them |
| 12 |
>> so if your main concern is reliability, I don't think it matters. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> If your concern is performance, CF seems to be used in more |
| 15 |
>> "professional" applications and more high-speed CF cards are readily |
| 16 |
>> available. |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> In either case I would suggest avoiding the cheap no-name brands. |
| 19 |
>> Sandisk Extreme Pro is likely the fastest card you can buy (of either |
| 20 |
>> CF or SD form factor), it is available up to 100MB/sec write speeds, |
| 21 |
>> but of course your card reader/host needs to support speeds like that. |
| 22 |
>> Sandisk also routinely has more than 10x the random I/O performance of |
| 23 |
>> most of the other brands which is important when using it on a |
| 24 |
>> computer and not in a linear recording device (photos/video). |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Thanks Paul, that's all pretty much what I'd concluded as well from my |
| 28 |
> research... |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> I went with the 4GB SanDisk Ultra though (30MB/s), since these will only be |
| 31 |
> used to boot the VMWare hypervisor (which runs fully in RAM once it is |
| 32 |
> booted)... |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> Now I'm looking forward to seeing them in action this weekend... :) |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
OK, I missed that piece. I presumed there would be writes to the hard disk. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Any reason you can't have these guys netboot? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
:wq |
Archives