Yes I suspect such write endurance issues do apply to lower grade SLC based flash drives, or drives without strong wear levelling, and not industrial products such as the MTRON one reviewed here.. which I note has a industrial 5 year warrenty. I'm looking forward to a review of the fusionIO drive, which looks way better than MTRON. (noting that Toms reviewed the old MTRON series and the newer series (nov 07) now reads at 120mb/s.
Regardless, I find that with my clients active databases, we tend to upgrade the machine every year anyway. The less active databases are just fine on SAS.
As someone who was bit on the ass by mtron SSD drives only a few months ago I'd like to point out that this claim is patently false. Out of 10 total 32gb mtron SSD drives we had a 30% failure rate when used as backing stores on a hi performance clustered mail server within the first
10 weeks. These drives are fast, but just like the competition, which I have also tested, they seem to have invested more money in developing fast throughput and less on a reliable controller, error checking and correction, spare block pooling, etc. I'm awaiting some eval units from STEC right now which I have high hopes for, after speaking with their implementation engineers on the phone and seeing the long list of DOD/NSA/DOT/MILspec certifications they have on data integrity (and in the case of their NSA spec drives, instant destroy... no joke) I suspect I'll find them up to the task. Seems they are having a hard time locating the eval stock for me to test their claims at the moment; although they were willing to ship me out a 40K usd fiberchannel drive, which I declined.
P.S. since rereading this post I sound like a S-TEC company shill/pr operative I feel it is necessary to point out that I have no relation to any of the companies which I've mentioned and have nothing to loose nor gain from sales or loss thereof from them. I'm only posting this to let people know of my personal experience.
P.P.S. mtron also recently re partnumbered their devices offering the drives which they considered "server appropriate" only 3 months back now as "desktop only" with a reduced warranty. Which leads me to believe they were willing to sell subpar equipment on the gamble that I wouldn't be able to wear them out so quick... bad gamble on their part.
Edit: Just looked at the pictures in the article again and noticed that the SN on the drive pictures is not even 300 units higher than the ones I had. A look back through my emails had the first two drives we received failing after 7 weeks with aprox 70gb of daily write operations and the third failed after
6 days at a similar load. Their own white paper and the engineers advised that I should have expected an MTBF of a million hours and a write life 120years with 50gb daily writes (that last bit is from memory and be a bit off.)