[squeak-dev] Smalltalk and flash memory
pennell.david at gmail.com
Sat Jun 7 17:08:35 UTC 2008
Your comments about not having to intentionally manage writes of objects
indicates that you believe that the read/write/erase characteristics of
flash memory are similar to conventional memory. Cells in flash memory
can't be re-written without first erasing. Erasure occurs on block
boundaries. You can only erase a block a certain number of times (typically
in excess of 100,000). I find it convenient to think of flash as a very
fast replacement for disk drives. Compared to disks, it has very fast read
access, especially for random reads, but the block structured erase/write
protocol look more like a disk drive. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory for more.
Object persistence managers like GemStone, Glorp, etc, are still needed, but
flash memory will definitely change the way we think about persistent
PS - I did a quick search to see if there have been any breakthroughs in
flash other than price/density and didn't find anything. If anybody has
more info on this, please pass it along.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 5:50 PM, John M McIntosh <
johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Louis LaBrunda
> <Lou at keystone-software.com> wrote:
> > A Smalltalk program running on a server with a large amount of flash
> > could run without the need for another form of database. The flash
> memory would
> > be in addition to the normal memory, with both available as RAM. The
> > memory would not look like a hard disk replacement.
> You might want to do some reading about GemStone
> It does much of what you discuss. They have a free version so you can
> explore more how it behaves.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Squeak-dev