[HN Gopher] A custom-designed IDE SSD for old PCs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A custom-designed IDE SSD for old PCs
        
       Author : squarefoot
       Score  : 125 points
       Date   : 2023-01-23 17:47 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | Maursault wrote:
       | Very cool that capable individuals are paying attention to older
       | technology, but it's not like IDE SSD hasn't existed for a while.
       | Here's[1] one of the more recent selections, and it's been around
       | awhile.
       | 
       | Edit: oops, missed that it was a ZIF interface. Ok, well done.
       | 
       | [1] https://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/SSDMXLE120/
        
       | freitzkriesler wrote:
       | Silly question, do we have to worry about older PC OSes not
       | playing well with SSDs with excessive read/writes? I'd be
       | concerned about destroying drives in short order with swaps that
       | are miss behaving.
        
         | amir wrote:
         | Lack of OS-level TRIM support will slow down writes. TRIM also
         | allows SSDs to maintain wear leveling.
        
         | londons_explore wrote:
         | Older software tends to do far less 'background' stuff.
         | 
         | Whenever I run old OS's in virtualbox, I'm surprised that even
         | doing lots of stuff for a week rarely results in more than a
         | few GB's of writes.
         | 
         | So I don't think your concern is an issue for the typical case
         | in practice. Obviously there'll be corner cases, but I haven't
         | hit those yet.
        
         | willcipriano wrote:
         | You really have to go nuts with the writes to break a modern
         | SSD. I don't think the bandwidth is even high enough to do so
         | on purpose on a older machine.
        
           | rzzzt wrote:
           | Repeated defrag runs could wear some grooves into those bits.
           | Older versions of Windows will not look for (nor care about)
           | the "rotational" flag.
        
             | pkaye wrote:
             | Disable defrag
        
             | AshamedCaptain wrote:
             | Only Vista has automatically-scheduled background full
             | defragmentation and doesn't care about the rotational flag.
        
               | metalliqaz wrote:
               | Then we're good, because nobody is going to install
               | _that_ friggin OS
        
           | bob1029 wrote:
           | I was astonished at the remaining life on a Samsung 960 pro
           | when I checked the other day. I don't think I will have to
           | replace it this decade at the current pace.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | IE6 wrote:
         | Completely anecdotal observation with n=1 but FWIW I was an
         | early adopter of SSDs and put one in my thinkpad in college
         | running Win XP (this was before trim and all that) - it did
         | require my to "align the partitions" but once that was done I
         | did all my project work and would routinely hybernate my
         | laptop. It lasted all through college and years after. I
         | eventually just retired the device. SDD was fine. At the time
         | SSDs were "unusable" for desktop workloads because of their
         | perceived failure rates.
        
       | sidpatil wrote:
       | What are the advantages of this versus a PATA disk-on-module, a
       | CompactFlash card, or an SD-to-PATA adapter?
        
         | joenathanone wrote:
         | Nand should have better latency and write duration
        
           | samstave wrote:
           | Sure but what are the subjective positives?
           | 
           | Source: Ran Intel's game lab to seek out subjective positives
           | with SIMD when the MIPS and AMD and the other CPU company
           | were a threat... transmeta
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmeta
           | 
           | Look at what they lost....
           | 
           | I was talking with a DB Dev ~1998 at intel and his biggest
           | problem was figuring out hot to expand the money fields in
           | the DB to include the number of digits to reflect how much
           | money they had...
        
         | rsync wrote:
         | "What are the advantages of this versus a PATA disk-on-module,
         | a CompactFlash card, or an SD-to-PATA adapter?"
         | 
         | I wondered the same thing ...
         | 
         | I have thousands of days of uptime on various CF->IDE
         | configurations - many of which were critical infrastructure.
         | 
         | It's a really elegant solution because CF and IDE are pinout
         | compatible. No logic is required.
         | 
         | I set filesystems to be read-only so as not to burn out the CF
         | part and, again, some of these were in service for >10 years
         | and I have much higher confidence in this configuration than
         | any SSD based solution I have ever fielded.
        
         | daneel_w wrote:
         | Don't use SD/microSD storage for these things. It's terrible
         | for a number of reasons. Get yourself a cheap IDE-SATA adapter
         | instead and plug an old used 2.5" SATA SSD in there.
        
           | AshamedCaptain wrote:
           | > Don't use SD/microSD storage for these things. It's
           | terrible for a number of reasons.
           | 
           | Is it, really? My microSDs have already handled more lifetime
           | writes than all IDE HDDs I ever had combined.
        
             | thescriptkiddie wrote:
             | SD cards don't have wear leveling like real SSDs.
        
               | megous wrote:
               | SD cards have wear leveling. Probably comparable in
               | principle to dramless SSDs. I/O interface sucks, though.
        
             | daneel_w wrote:
             | I don't buy it, because it contradicts the very nature of
             | flash storage. Unless you used your IDE HDDs as pinatas,
             | that is. But the problems specific to SD/microSD and USB
             | flash drives are more than limited longevity. The
             | underlying SDIO protocol/interface of this storage type has
             | several shortcomings making it awful for general operating
             | system use entailing frequent intermixed writes and reads,
             | including bringing the whole storage (and with it the OS)
             | to a complete read-blocked freeze during extended and small
             | rapid writes.
        
               | mike_d wrote:
               | Tell that to the original Raspberry Pi's floating around
               | that are old enough to be enrolled in high school.
        
               | ilyt wrote:
               | "Hey, original Raspberry Pi, you have no bulk flash
               | storage on board so I don't know why this guy is trying
               | to get you into unrelated discussion about durability of
               | bulk flash storage in the first place!"
               | 
               | Here, I told it.
               | 
               | Also they are "just" 11 years old so you've managed to be
               | wrong on everything you said somehow..
        
               | mardifoufs wrote:
               | On their original SD card? Probably not, especially on
               | the earlier raspi models.
        
               | daneel_w wrote:
               | I have, on numerous occasions. It's one of the reasons
               | why general desktop use on them can be so infuriating.
        
               | li2uR3ce wrote:
               | That's not been my experience with the original Pis. We
               | ended up mounting cards as read only because they
               | wouldn't last otherwise. Syslog and various other
               | processes, even with light IO would render the cards
               | useless after a month or two.
        
               | daneel_w wrote:
               | Also: a lot of OS distributions aimed at SBCs with
               | microSD storage forgetting to set _noatime /relatime_ on
               | their file systems, to avoid thousands upon thousands of
               | writes for access time updates whenever files are _read_.
               | It 's only just recently that OS vendors finally woke up
               | and realized what was going on.
        
               | megous wrote:
               | relatime is default option since forever. (certainly
               | since before rpi was even a thing)
               | 
               | https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v2.6.30/source/fs/namesp
               | ace... (some random old kernel)
        
               | cevn wrote:
               | I have old raspis, the SD card failed.
        
               | AshamedCaptain wrote:
               | > I don't buy it, because it contradicts the very nature
               | of flash storage.
               | 
               | No, it really doesn't. Besides, both capacities _and_
               | performance have increased a lot since the top-of-the-
               | line IDE HDDs. It's easy enough to see that e.g. a user
               | of a Steam Deck probably writes daily a couple orders of
               | magnitude more to a microSD than even a heavy a Windows
               | 98 user did to its HDD. Even the writes caused by
               | desfragmenting your average era HDD daily is practically
               | peanuts to a TB microSD, but it was definitely not
               | peanuts to the HDD itself.
               | 
               | > The underlying SDIO protocol/interface of this storage
               | type has several shortcomings making it awful for general
               | operating system use entailing frequent intermixed writes
               | and reads
               | 
               | We are comparing this to IDE. Not NVME on top of PCIe.
               | 
               | TL;DR I have a pile of broken microSD hards, but I also
               | have a larger pile of broken old HDDs.
        
         | asveikau wrote:
         | I agree that these things are readily available, but given that
         | we're reading it on github, maybe it's somebody's tinkering
         | project.
        
           | systems_glitch wrote:
           | That's really the only valid reason to do this, which is of
           | course reason enough :P
        
         | andrewf wrote:
         | Can anyone recommend a specific device they've observed to work
         | on a G4 Mac mini? (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B087CL5KHL
         | and https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07Z67GX6W together did
         | not work. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07QN9STY7 and a
         | random SATA drive did not work and did not fit)
        
           | duffyjp wrote:
           | The eBay listings are long gone, but in 2019 I ordered an
           | adapter and a cheap used Samsung sata m.2 and they work
           | perfectly in my G4 Mac Mini.
           | 
           | The SSD listing descriptions were:
           | 
           | * "2 Pack M.2 NGFF SATA SSD to 2.5 inch IDE 44PIN Converter
           | Adapter with Case"
           | 
           | * "256GB SATA-III Solid State Drive M.2 2280 Samsung PM871
           | MZ-NLN2560 Lenovo SSD"
        
           | visualphoenix wrote:
           | I used https://eshop.macsales.com/item/Addonics/ADSAIDE/ to
           | upgrade some Glyph drives to ssd when connected to a g5 audio
           | rig a few years ago
        
           | Palomides wrote:
           | I use this in my 3400c, probably fine for your mac mini
           | https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00AQT2LCU
        
             | giantrobot wrote:
             | There used to (maybe still are) PATA SSDs from a brand
             | called King Spec on Amazon that I have used in a number of
             | machines. I have used them in a G3 PowerBook (Lombard), a
             | Sony VAIO laptop, and an IBM ThinkPad. These are all just
             | for funsies machines so I make no claims of those drives'
             | reliability. I don't have any irreplaceable data on any of
             | those drives.
        
         | systems_glitch wrote:
         | Add in there IDE to SATA and IDE to mSATA/M.2. If you just need
         | to plug a non-ancient disk into IDE, there are tons of options.
        
       | daneel_w wrote:
       | Nice work, especially reverse-engineering the controller. I use a
       | $5 bidirectional IDE<->SATA adapter.
        
         | iforgotpassword wrote:
         | These initialize kinda slow, using one in the Xbox doubles to
         | triples the boot up time. It's been a couple years but iirc
         | there basically were only two different chips.
        
           | daneel_w wrote:
           | The ones I have all "come online" faster than a mechanical
           | HDD spins up and incur no slowdown. Things run at full Ultra
           | ATA speeds. You may have run into one with quirky firmware or
           | so - there are quite a few different chipsets.
        
       | calvinmorrison wrote:
       | I just saw a dual m2 with raid that fits in a 2.5 laptop slot.
       | Who else wants laptop raid?
        
         | kristopolous wrote:
         | I've been doing it for a long long time with the SD card slot
        
           | ilyt wrote:
           | Wouldn't raid1 just make both cards fail roughly at same time
           | ? After all you're writing same amount of data on both
        
       | marcodiego wrote:
       | What I really want: a very fast volatile SSD. Reason: my notebook
       | RAM is maxed out and I don't want to throw it off; a fast
       | volatile SSD would allow me to use it as a swap device.
       | 
       | Is there such a thing?
        
         | kccqzy wrote:
         | A regular SSD will do. But if your notebook is old, it may only
         | support SATA based SSD, which is not considered fast any more.
        
           | snuxoll wrote:
           | 6Gb(it)ps of a maxed out SATA III link is still not slow,
           | it's just that the multi-GB(yte)ps speeds of modern PCIe
           | drives is just insanely fast. My TrueNAS box has 3x2 mirrored
           | vdevs of 7200RPM drives and has plenty of bandwidth to handle
           | multiple 4K ProRes streams, the only reason I have PCIe
           | storage (an Optane 800P) on it is because I don't want to
           | waste a precious 3.5" bay for a SLOG device to handle sync
           | writes (VM workloads).
        
         | picture wrote:
         | Why not just a fast SSD, without being volatile?
        
           | marcodiego wrote:
           | Because by being volatile, it could be faster.
        
             | p1mrx wrote:
             | Have you actually looked for a fast SSD? Your laptop's
             | SATA/PCIe interface is probably the bottleneck at this
             | point.
        
             | joshenders wrote:
             | Solution, meet problem?
        
             | WithinReason wrote:
             | It couldn't, since it would be limited by bus width anyway.
        
         | soganess wrote:
         | Not volatile, but Optane? Even in the era of super fast pcie4
         | ssds, the random read times for optane is like 6-10x faster.
         | Fast enough that intel put optane into ram module for
         | persistence.
         | 
         | Plus intel sold nand ssd drives (model H20?) that had a 32gb
         | optane module on board. You can just use the optane for swap
         | and the nand as your main drive.
        
           | favorited wrote:
           | Also, consumer Optane is hella cheap at the moment. For
           | example, : https://www.newegg.com/intel-optane-
           | ssd-p1600x-118gb/p/1Z4-0...?
        
             | samstave wrote:
             | Q: ;
             | 
             | I have multiple TBs of SSD currently, how is Optane better
             | at ~118 GBs of stuff... Why would I want this over that?
        
               | 0xCMP wrote:
               | If you're doing lots of writes it will not wear out the
               | same way an SSD would. Also it's very fast, but these
               | days not as fast as the best NVMe SSDs you can buy now.
        
               | FpUser wrote:
               | Optane has insane write endurance. Speed is good as well.
               | It is expensive for sure but I guess it can be justified
               | for some database use.
        
               | wongarsu wrote:
               | I think of optane not so much as a mass storage device,
               | and more as a fast scratch space. The perfect place to
               | put your swap partition, to use as cache in front of
               | slower storage, the scratch space of an algorithm that
               | starts using disk space to save memory, or the
               | intermediate output of your compiler.
        
               | TomatoTomato wrote:
               | Orders of magnitude better wear capabilities and much
               | faster at low queue depth operations
        
               | paulmd wrote:
               | Much lower latency. Optane doesn't have any of the "page"
               | / "cell" bullshit that flash imposes, so there's really
               | no need for buffers at all. Writes just go straight to
               | disk basically, at almost zero latency, NVMe itself
               | imposes much more latency than the actual reads/writes.
        
         | jewel wrote:
         | On Linux there is zram which creates a first-priority swap
         | partition that just compresses the pages and keeps them in
         | memory.
         | 
         | It looks like Windows also has memory compression.
         | 
         | I believe that OS X has memory compression turned on by
         | default.
        
           | denysonique wrote:
           | >I believe that OS X has memory compression turned on by
           | default.
           | 
           | It isn't just turned on by default, there is no way of
           | turning it off.
        
           | iforgotpassword wrote:
           | Zram is actually a general purpose block device, you can
           | format it with ext4 and have a compressed RAM disk.
           | 
           | There is also zswap, which is a transparent compressed RAM
           | cache in front of your cache partition. Most distros have it
           | enabled by default, so make sure you don't use it together
           | with swap in zram.
        
         | jonatron wrote:
         | A single board computer with something like a 10GbE connection
         | to your laptop.
        
         | pkaye wrote:
         | Having worked on SSD firmware, that would simplify a lot of the
         | code in the firmware if we didn't have to recover things after
         | a power loss. But I don't think it would improve performance a
         | lot.
        
         | snuxoll wrote:
         | There used to be a product called ZeusRAM which was a small
         | (like 8GB) SSD with a matching amount of DRAM. In normal use
         | all operations were done on the DRAM, and when power was lost
         | it would use charge held in a super-cap to flush the data out
         | to the NAND.
         | 
         | Haven't seen any purely volatile drives, though.
        
           | birdyrooster wrote:
           | Oh wow lol, this reminds me of Windows Vista days and
           | Microsoft's ReadyBoost for using a USB flash drive as extra
           | memory for disk caching because it was hammering peoples
           | disks. Good times.
        
           | andai wrote:
           | So when power is restored it restores the RAM and turns back
           | on like nothing happened?
        
           | jonatron wrote:
           | The Gigabyte i-RAM from 2005/2006, featured in a LTT video.
        
         | paulmd wrote:
         | Optane SSDs. 2242 devices should fit in an ExpressCard bay
         | (which is electrically a PCIe slot) but the only adapters are
         | from ThinkMod and the owner of that company has kinda
         | disappeared.
        
         | systems_glitch wrote:
         | These used to exist, PCI cards loaded up with DRAM, optionally
         | battery-backed. Some talked over a drive interface like SCSI or
         | SATA. I don't know that anyone bothers with them nowadays,
         | since the target was never laptops and it's easy to cram a
         | _lot_ of RAM in a not-laptop.
        
           | scintill76 wrote:
           | Here's a list of some: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAM_driv
           | e#History_and_operatin...
        
       | mattst88 wrote:
       | dosdude1 is awesome. He replaced the BGA CPU in my iMac G4 with a
       | 1.7 GHz MC7448 (https://mattst88.com/computers/imacg4/) and made
       | a video about the process:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnpdLt4OIFs
       | 
       | He's got two videos about this custom IDE SSD on his YouTube
       | channel here:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrBz-6lXbZQ
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMCz0VsEbqc
        
         | marktangotango wrote:
         | I'm hoping he makes a video detailing the pcb design and
         | layout. Very impressive project using Kicad!
        
         | hot_gril wrote:
         | Yeah he's one of the big online names in classic Mac stuff.
        
       | squarefoot wrote:
       | Edit: edited out "Dosdude" which is the name of the author, not
       | the project.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-01-23 23:00 UTC)