On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 11:08:14PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >  > lfs?
> >
> > It's not clear LFS is necessarily a good fit.
> >
> > Sure, you could just turn off the cleaner.  But then eventually you
> > run out of space, and have to do a cleaning cycle.  Which means you've
> > written the same data twice.
> 
> anyway lfs spreads writes well through whole disks, while ffs writes lots
> of times to same places like bitmaps, inodes etc..

SanDisk claims their CF cards do wear-level balancing internally, so writing
the "same block" in FFS 10000 times doesn't mean writing the same address in
the FLASH that many times.  Like Jason said, minimizing the number of writes
is all that's needed.

I don't know about other CF manufacturers, but without wear-level balancing,
their cards would die pretty soon when used with msdosfs, for example.

  -jm