250218 Michael wrote:

-- details of using 'f3probe' snipped --

This is good news, it confirms neither of them are counterfeit units. However, the 2nd stick appears to be defective. It takes almost 3.5 times
as long than the first stick and from what we know for no good reason.
This indicates the second stick has bad flash cells,
a bad flash controller, or both. I would return the bad stick as defective, asking for it to be replaced.

In my experience stores are box shifters. Goods In - Goods Out.
They try to buy from wholesalers with whom they have some relationship
based on price-reliability-convenience and who they hope
also apply similar criteria in their relationships up the supply chain.
Any link in this chain can go wrong and you end up with bad goods.
I don't expect them to perform QA/QC
beyond looking at the shipping labels and customs declarations.
The manufacturers may perform some actual quality checks on a sampling basis after the prototypes have been put together
and the brand reps may audit the odd production run.
I would think the rigour of such checks
is proportional to the value of the assembled items.

Yes, that's very much what one would expect of any successful retailer.
My experience with Canada Computers since 2000 -- 25 yr -- has been good : they do try not to sell anything which cb unreliable.
However, as you say, all it takes is 1 broken link in a long chain.

I tried formatting one of the sticks using Gparted + Glances.
After 10 hr while I was asleep, it had formatted 1 partition
& was clearly stalled on the 2nd : the Parted progress bar was moving to-fro, Glances reported critically high CPU I/O wait of c 25 %
& that it was writing small amounts of data to the partition every 30 sec .
I had to cancel Gparted from the root command line
& then tested the 1st partition, which allowed me to edit a file,
but was very slow at everything.

So yes, at least 1 of the sticks is unusable & probably both.
I can take/mail them back to the store & ask them to test them with Linux
& refund my CAD if they confirm they're defective.
I would expect this store to be honorable re it
& to be pleased to have someone report the problem
st they can report back to their supplier & avoid future trouble.

Frank had a useful suggestion re alternative devices,
which I will reply to separately. Your own comments thereon wb useful.

--
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb
ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT `-O----------O---' purslowatcadotinterdotnet

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday 18 February 2025 18:54:07 Greenwich Mean Time Philip Webb wrote:

So yes, at least 1 of the sticks is unusable & probably both.
I can take/mail them back to the store & ask them to test them with Linux
& refund my CAD if they confirm they're defective.

I would refrain from stating anything which could well be outside their sphere of knowledge or understanding. Hence I would not mention Linux, ext2,
gparted, or anything exotic for the average MSWindows user, beyond:

"I just cannot format these sticks - they took many, many hours and eventually failed. They are not like the previous USB sticks I bought FROM YOUR SHOP.
Can I please replace them for something more reliable AND FASTER. If need be at a higher price point."

I would expect this store to be honorable re it
& to be pleased to have someone report the problem
st they can report back to their supplier & avoid future trouble.

Frank had a useful suggestion re alternative devices,
which I will reply to separately. Your own comments thereon wb useful.

For reliable NAND flash storage on a modern PC which can make use of the
higher speeds, I wholeheartedly agree the M.2 small form factor SSD drive within a USB enclosure must be a consideration. Or one of the external SATA SSDs which are physically bigger, with a USB cable.

There are also USB enclosures (caddies), in which you can buy and install a suitable M.2 or 2.5" SATA SSD of your choice; e.g.:

https://plugable.com/products/usbc-nvme/

The SSDs come with a fast DRAM cache which accelerates transfers of smaller files, so the difference in speed from your flaky USB sticks will be very noticeable.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAme1E/8ACgkQseqq9sKV ZxkxLxAA3bhokqcHf9uKBodFxIoa7uoGoTvjsHRELLy1U6QzESzPJJWb7Jl78ZiG 3CGjYMhMl93ZSc1wG3y2p6MiL55wwMsbqkttnJisBeL4r0psJZaYYTd0JW7s8/4z cctJeMCpgUEyeA3ykjDS8bbYRjEip/O9MgS/Y0AIkhPrZiLKmSqTfLzIJ3WlS7HR 7lHHCja8q5jhzNUImWQS9Dkb2JbM93zZrErCaqO+vgON9y0W6GsicyvK5put1VxL 7WjPTbf5pNr89THiIZsgHmI0hSWj/Ky1Y7SuNS8wPRthD6Jf2B52goibgD5INeGb /ZjvI1s0NkkAc+zlIH2bGsJuq/7Eyv0yJ5iDTT5ePxepFfZQMvo0lI0/k4z3K8KX nRHd8zJyyQ1sl6egf9uUX7u02TldkTndOOQ+sH0kCrwYxOES3PqWNiL9y5lIgIWY 30r8SfsBgkwOhnY1/Jf16RFA7KRYtg9rFysBiKBEoqBL54nah90He7qPWw9sL+A8 oDyK1JdNzEbiU79u+h5iZNarh6EzN5PMUgXhpsVL1inHpYcKpVB/wI9NwB/oW/XW fQMwnw7soDi36OprpEY3mizNUrIguy3iex73xQx5YEMgDQjuFgPx1U2sZkAEtFSO iUHvfwMBjOMlt/iF5xi7paUlceAe46cNNCeAPYX0bYKYggXYZkI=
=pjmP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/18/25 16:13, Michael wrote:

For reliable NAND flash storage on a modern PC which can make use of the higher speeds, I wholeheartedly agree the M.2 small form factor SSD drive within a USB enclosure must be a consideration. Or one of the external SATA SSDs which are physically bigger, with a USB cable.

I have been using a Samsung portable SSD with USB 3 connectivity for
quite some time. I used to work in an area with very limited internet
for weeks at a time and used the disk to put some media to read, watch,
or listen on it at home that I could take to my work location to use
during my time off. The transfer speed after upgrading from a standard
USB drive to the SSD was amazing and I never looked back. Of course,
there is a price increase for the increased speed.

Eric

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Am Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 12:18:30PM -0600 schrieb Dale:

Michael wrote:

I use external USB sticks a lot for critical backup files, world, /etc
and most important, /root where some of my so called scripts live. 
Reading this thread made me question even more the dependability of USB sticks.  I've read elsewhere that even some highly respected brands are heading down the road to being iffy.  So, I just bought a enclosure and
a m.2 stick.  This is what I got. 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CYLDM23M

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DQSX3Z76

You should have announced it beforehand, so we could have given you input as usual. :) I’m sure it will work just fine as temporary storage, but don’t use it as singular backup device without, well, backup. Because I feel the urge to dampen your mood by saying that the E100 is a very very cheap model, if not the cheapest of all from any of the big named brands. It’s probably still better than sticks, I guess.

The E100 just came out, so there are no long-term experiences available yet. There has been a news item on my German hardware site on its recent release: https://www.computerbase.de/news/storage/heimlich-eingefuehrt-ssd-serie-crucial-e100-erreicht-den-markt-im-tbw-tiefflug.91090/

Google-translated to English: https://www-computerbase-de.translate.goog/news/storage/heimlich-eingefuehrt-ssd-serie-crucial-e100-erreicht-den-markt-im-tbw-tiefflug.91090/?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The ghist of the article:
- It’s so low-profile there was no press announcement by the manufacturer.
- According to the article, it has a new record low for guaranteed lifetime
writes (TBW, terabytes written). The article has a nice table of
comparison with many other SSDs. The next best has more than twice the
amount.
- The (slighty harsh) comments speak of leftover recycling. The users are
hard-core gamers though, so the best is just good enough for them.

https://www.techpowerup.com/ssd-specs/crucial-e100-480-gb.d2306 mentions TLC and no DRAM, though the computerbase article speaks of QLC (which is more likely, especially given the TWB value). So don’t expect a speed miracle, especially behind USB.

Another thing to consider: don’t put it into the safe for a year without powering it up. As was explained in a previous mail, QLC uses sixteen different levels of charge inside one single flash cell. The chance of a bit flip increases the longer the SSD is powerless and charge slowly (very
slowly) dissipates. It’s hard to find exact numbers, and it’s more of a statistical question. Could be a research topic for a slow Sunday. ;-)
Also, don’t you live in a hot area?

I don’t know if an SSD does a re-charge regularly by itself, or whether you need to actually read out the cells for the controller to notice any issues. This may be another good research topic. You could simply tar the entire mounted SSD to /dev/null to read the entire payload once (without reading
the unused areas to save time):
tar cf /dev/null /path/to/filesystem/

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

A circle is a round square.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEVbE9o2D2lE5fhoVsizG+tUDUMMoFAme3r24ACgkQizG+tUDU MMq+Ug/+MAimB1IAiTtcFeJhGkD8E1tEYDeSY0hYfgUbe23ylwWKDetSyHih+/Oi bAnwAyyQqO8ewsQqdRevS5jgDeKCSikqqpTMY3bQZLFOTLGIdvUO/UnVRQ8YxwPf AJFwR7V1pscvqUFPWhZIzAGeLCtXUhIsNNo0yLWr78PcLjJ067yY4W23TEzbcsI7 AOHdOTENQDrllBSOjZAExk+tZCoNdQjy7dzgSbjpLHkFLRs83liMXPZTVzAKEowW oiVAO+NCMn23PxRb6Gqi731M+ClnC5u+0NwCSaKrCWinEofT51x6XIxZUSzryPlo h6Oih4G3xN0NwYMNjnzPuyEGhmBOv3yBHYedoyvzgjOv+t1wGEq7YfzAT0I0hhHo Ge5itFD0Am/yguIltEhXdxbEy9mI5OoAw5vNOJkLodfwpTTB1A1WTHtbWqozdBQ4 mQ8bR08YKciNbUjEMmOO+JjC4pB1x0xBh6UiJO7EJX2nD8bwMsWk4CqgZ19UWL/C mHePHgfXbioDUiiNquiMMbQVJic+zze2rxWpG+9INQMDj97VtlrWT/gFR/wx26m+ IDt5EUR+b7znm6H8fIXOaJV/7TsrulcNR5GvAKkVTZ1xcgFbXpDcZgKtl9qAKW+v HNckL1u0LCjGDM1BPZP1NBu6hOpjmtw8OJtj+tTQoeVSKSOsDhc=
=DsqX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32

Am Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 11:40:48PM +0100 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger:

Another thing to consider: don’t put it into the safe for a year without powering it up. As was explained in a previous mail, QLC uses sixteen different levels of charge inside one single flash cell. The chance of a bit flip increases the longer the SSD is powerless and charge slowly (very slowly) dissipates. It’s hard to find exact numbers, and it’s more of a statistical question. Could be a research topic for a slow Sunday. ;-)
Also, don’t you live in a hot area?

I knew I’ve seen this data in the past, but couldn’t remeber where and in what context. I just stumbled upon the relevant info again.

If you search for "jedec temperature and data retention" you find this PDF: https://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/Alvin_Cox%20%5BCompatibility%20Mode%5D_0.pdf

It contains establised standard values for flash durability. On slide 28 it says:
Client-class SSDs should retain their data w/o power for 1 year if used
8 hours/day at 40 °C and kept at or below 30 °C when off.
There is also a table for other temperatures; the time is cut in half for
5 degrees more.

Mind you, that PDF is 15 years old, TLS had just been released to the public one year earlier according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_cell#Triple-level_cell

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

Some are so convinced, they don’t even know anymore of what.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEVbE9o2D2lE5fhoVsizG+tUDUMMoFAmfMv/wACgkQizG+tUDU MMpPXhAApbc+zBWDTN4fVzdp2CSlWLuZZsbJ4k1vvZZJilhheT8jwRJinnwbvv5Y NEZlX5HGlBY//JFcdjSQNBqUq5IyhAomGRfN8SPkrGccpDMGwfs04nAqS93wu2wh mLhfjnZRLSqc6+65eMLl30yq0ZYhy83QyApe2abHjNccap87JFCAR7+p9leuMqKk NBVSX3JPAcsy8lj1s2wiZTQezzfzfsufCQtsHBZBb4HoMRBPZHoAzcJ3WaUzleWg JYv5Z53tdf60cN+WvolSH7v+dGUG3YXu1xlM+Dstxk+Xb2hWqsrALYo0kEn20xxi rHt6n+681uxjFes6mPLRR4WRAdjLc/NuRaaYF6y/BanRq0rpnPPSJKnqYN/216Il ZNywjbvSvTpRKngE3ixuMWcAfX3dgsehaKsJDqzzHN1v24CJDh6ZwdW8KR6Aazk7 dOVxGddBJp5QlyPB1N4FMkCHKLr9NIMlu/4NAQ6ohNegqPPUXa1XMkAtxh3HE+Vh 1tzevJRzWV2SC7A7EuwmUJ8FmBpzdgCr0boQfIaeWod87xA8nMQt0zKpqKHDO7GM m3vRaWnObNd/yCSgADhsE3n0KBVK7UZdxqlgqXBAPfJnnE6XJRHQnE7X6Qukm9Sk 1EJx8ErqX7Tr6zgflqP4StBSRQhn8CiyqrMbXz4RPGgbcAWVDvY=
=RsIn
-----END PGP SI

On Saturday, 8 March 2025 22:48:29 Greenwich Mean Time Dale wrote:

Frank Steinmetzger wrote:

Am Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 11:40:48PM +0100 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger:

Another thing to consider: don’t put it into the safe for a year without >> powering it up. As was explained in a previous mail, QLC uses sixteen
different levels of charge inside one single flash cell. The chance of a >> bit flip increases the longer the SSD is powerless and charge slowly
(very slowly) dissipates. It’s hard to find exact numbers, and it’s more
of a statistical question. Could be a research topic for a slow Sunday.
;-) Also, don’t you live in a hot area?

I knew I’ve seen this data in the past, but couldn’t remeber where and in
what context. I just stumbled upon the relevant info again.

If you search for "jedec temperature and data retention" you find this
PDF: https://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/Alvin_Cox%20%5BCompatibility%20M ode%5D_0.pdf

It contains establised standard values for flash durability. On slide 28
it
says:
Client-class SSDs should retain their data w/o power for 1 year if used
8 hours/day at 40 °C and kept at or below 30 °C when off.
There is also a table for other temperatures; the time is cut in half for
5 degrees more.

Mind you, that PDF is 15 years old, TLS had just been released to the public one year earlier according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_cell#Triple-level_cell

-- Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’ Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network. Some are so convinced,
they don’t even know anymore of what.

That is confusing. Data should be OK for one year without power but
only if powered 8 hours per day. Me scratches my head. Maybe it means should be OK for a year without power and not sure what to think about
rest.

As I understand it these are two different performance requirements, which were stipulated in this proposed standard back in 2010.

The first, "Active Use (power on)", describes the level of performance on a typical client workload and operating environment, 8hrs/day at 40°C. I don't know if this is controller temperature, NAND flash cell temperature, device sensor temperature, PC case temperature, or room temperature. The actual standard document would explain this, as well as the method for measuring it. Meanwhile, I note my NVMe SSD's sensor tells me the drive is idling at 45.8°C as I write this. o_O

The second, "Retention Use (power off)", sets a limit of 1 year @30°C.

The FFR and UBER thresholds apply to *both* of the above.

I suspect that things have changed a lot in that time frame despite the confusion. They may have improved things significantly since then.

Hmm ... I wouldn't take this to the bank. Standards are typically formulated following consultation with industry to establish the art of the possible, but without cutting too much slack on manufacturers so as to promote innovation and improvement. The manufacturers seek to minimise overall costs, while keeping their head above the thresholds stated in the standard. So there's a tension right there, which hopefully delivers innovation and ideally lowers costs over time - but it does not necessarily improve performance. Check how quality of USB flash drives has gone south over the years, following the trajectory of their price.

The move from SLC to QLC has been effective in reducing costs, but at some point the limits of physics will constrain performance. It would be interesting to dig out the latest JEDEC standard and compare thresholds to see how they may have improved with more modern manufacturing methods.

Still, if the one year part, less the other part, is accurate then but
better now, then my powering up even once a month should be OK. I only
need to worry about if something happens to me and no one touches it for
many months, a year or longer.

Given the temperature of the device would probably be below 30°C for at least half of the year in day time and most nights, I would think your data will be fine. :-)

I have a 11 year old Toshiba OCZ SSD, which gave me a scare a week ago. It reported an I/O error, dmesg showed it being inaccessible - I can't remember the exact error. I thought it was game up with this drive, but surprisingly following my reseating the SATA cable and a reboot later it has worked without further complaints. With reports of OCZ drives failing at an alarming rate more than a decade ago, I am happy it has lasted this long.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmfNbfcACgkQseqq9sKV ZxmmJA/9EdkHM0hDITXVEx1Wk/uLYHrh627iwl5refRE/H+JIlZWazjTHA8ZUlbM GoCAVE+A6cc9zwZA11C846q2hLXukgWVx2xx6T3/Ubb0By66DSreLAYwFKuA5biC IHR25S46NiLJK6YffKpEhKF5SWyY5stkFIoggTOfAFu+rPGOvkxrfpLnfiRQRO9K WRAqvhNfxHsRBewSYojV/BuKaHKFndxk1Dn4REHurlwDQ5IJGL3o3r2M2N7EWPoA 1IH4ANbnT5SD/SDugaw/+x2vreA0ZW67TdTJ8wkV2hjBp8pBFCTD9GpHufNbVeFR 2F57JaGtb0oIq0vQCFydfILUUBnyDyrGSywD2XTe9a4ztio609o5IxH6s4inyAZg Whuj8rcRJS7IoVG7Vyuh2YA8UX1ToKhQwy8jvo2Xbkmw4yGsH2ADIxa3RLGHxp3a KWB5jpkjTQ8Smj84ZmQLbYG6y84Bpqz6DembZLvIDZqgxs3tS2SffBVajevqrAIv Fz6oL5i1uwq7G55PLeYiafM14+mkItH6/Z63NgSyqVligng1b44sTLOn6ksZCKAn KgCm2nHcs1MZe3IMyTZoWN0LuQOcBdNIFXvFhmeITGS8pElvZsQEsslSmXfNxvhW FhGIPgryZ1kjCcU3iGGZYoMXGqXrOoPeyEyHy0ASTYQ516Uxekk=
=WlLz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Am Sun, Mar 09, 2025 at 10:32:37PM -0500 schrieb Dale:

I suspect it is safer than on a USB.  I believe that the old spinning
rust is likely the most durable long term storage without powering up
during storage.  I once hooked up a bunch of old IDE drives that hadn't
had power to them in years.  I went poking around and all the data was
still there.  It had some old videos, pictures, text files and other stuff.  They all appeared fine to me.  Those drives sat in a out
building with no climate control at all.  Some were sitting on a shelf
bare, no static bag or anything.  They stored just fine.  Heck, I was worried about the circuit boards more than anything.  Still, they worked. 

HDD certainly have good long-term data retention properties in their
magnetic platters. Their weakness is the mechanics. Especially with very old disks that haven’t run in ages, you might get stuck bearings because the lubricant lost its viscosity. Or on newer disks the helium diffuses out. AFAIK, helium drives should still work without it, but at reduced
performance and they’ll run hotter.

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

What is the Egyptian work for cowshed? – Moo-barrack.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEVbE9o2D2lE5fhoVsizG+tUDUMMoFAmfO4pEACgkQizG+tUDU MMrv1A/+MrcXAkTvpMZ3yZsq6RyExZ+s2PbswzD7N2mWGqoVJZnyNvUURBVsP4sp Y5GogXTC5DRpH8W+iYJU++BQYgposekbnMVi6uxHsymLi/6tNgh9rqVe7K82UFLC NN35T8WNjZZAttOjr9rnrzM7TLJHdTPv98ttJB8n9ZTqmDEIQzJRzzIWrMl26wI6 Vwa4JpY+lPriWq9I23MGJ3qNLMcIFzPTJja7Nj5HfJuMoGnsZaQhVQF92yWX0cp9 EDiaYClvITZmmKzgeiNS6lFse+39Yd092zr8MRjvOnG3hdWpxooNLUpsqDR3kPFj 8IO+U6/e5zpifIT//65R1SH0cxnmaoVHLLvp0755HPR/pMnjoowB7wWVOHHCtkUB jPiKHfsjwKmGNpXgM7dIiUPxCRacQMxxvDCz+vWbWnpGhMjT5PxgY7UqIpvaJy1z qSFOiLDsWzYClvr1Jwvewe+dFu3fZQLmQ4BDtxHEXzoJugBbQWtEuJM56hmmfuZ2 lIpCCCA/QVW/hDLO9hHwazfq8pTtnrLg/e0gGVrafLnQ4ySZQ9RITEcjPlbOtb0H YKkSpU1O5RFMKM46776WtMoe5acRJlTx2c277UgqLFuuhbRtYQFEJ+tngJDZS/Bc ayVxJGdra2c5cE/80Dm/aF5Ibw7/6WLP90QM8KgQ2z6/fIbNnYc=
=38mN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE