HPE tells users to patch SSDs to prevent failure after 32,768 hours of operation
-
32768 hours == 3 years, 8+ months. 65536 hours == 7 years, 5+ months, which is more than the typical 5 years guarantee for enterprise SSDs. Who wants to be on HPE using a signed (rather than an unsigned) comparison in the wrong place? :doh:
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
Kent Sharkey wrote:
OK, who used an int16 variable to hold the lifespan?
A Millenial who thinks Y2K refers to a meme webspace.
-
32768 hours == 3 years, 8+ months. 65536 hours == 7 years, 5+ months, which is more than the typical 5 years guarantee for enterprise SSDs. Who wants to be on HPE using a signed (rather than an unsigned) comparison in the wrong place? :doh:
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
I see 32,668 or similar number, and expect some reference that the issue is due to a 16 bit number. Article: i do not understand. Plus its on the hours of operation, like "hey, if we create a different counting means to brick the device, people wont know." Me: "your not paying me more to do that, so im just gonna use the built in seconds timer."