(That said, new SSDs seem to have enough spare space to continue working fine even if TRIM is never used, but I haven't done or sought any research into how this affects their performance, it's just my general guess.) Your SSD won't burst into flames if you choose to not use TRIM at all (even if it's manufactured by Samsung) it will only become somewhat slower at accepting writes once it thinks that 100% of the disk is in use. The fstrim service will write to syslog every time it's invoked: $ journalctl -u fstrimįeb 07 19:18:23 fstrim: /: 484.5 GiB (520173604864 bytes) trimmed on /dev/sdb3 This is often done using the "fstrim.timer" systemd unit. (Even more so, you can see a notice in your linked article that a few older SATA-based SSDs didn't support "queued" TRIM, which meant all operations – even reads – must wait until the TRIM request finishes its job.)įor that reason, most systems instead choose the first option and schedule fstrim -Av every week or so. (Asynchronous discard is only present in XFS and very recently in Btrfs.) I would also imagine unnecessarily frequent discard operations don't help the SSD lifetime much, either.
The second option has usually been avoided because it is synchronous – most filesystems wait every time until discard is complete, which makes syncing writes to disk rather slow as discard is not exactly a fast operation. Periodically: When the fstrim tool asks it to.Ĭontinuously: Whenever files are deleted, if the filesystem was mounted with the discard option. The kernel only issues the discard operation in two occassions: This answer was kindly answered by on.
0 kommentar(er)
