On 2/9/06, Charles Manning <Charles.Manning@trimble.co.nz> wrote:

> If people didn't care about their data they'd just use FAT :-).

Not if they don't want to get on the wrong side of a Microsoft patent
lawyer... because FAT isn't a trivially stupid filesystem but is in
fact a fantastic, e-enabled and highly modern piece of shite suited
for all the wrong uses.

> If I was to implement a less cautious policy it would be along the lines
> of what Claudio says:

> *) ECC errors would trigger a garbage collection cycle on the block
> (copy off and erase). I would, however add a "three strikes and you're
> out" extension to that to make things safer (ie. Once 3 ECC errors are
> detected on a block, we'd retire the block).

> *) Actual write error would cause a retirement.

But then you'd need to have a switch for that since the rest of us
would want it to default to being off :-)

Jon.