From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F6D1384C1 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:04:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DA7A51425B; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:04:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8186141A2 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:04:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZWQdD-0005vQ-EM for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:04:23 +0200 Received: from rrcs-71-40-157-251.se.biz.rr.com ([71.40.157.251]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:04:23 +0200 Received: from wireless by rrcs-71-40-157-251.se.biz.rr.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:04:23 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: James Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Was re: system uptime Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:04:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20150830040443.GA1081@ca.inter.net> <8551914.hU4FhT7smn@wstn> <55E42184.6080002@gmail.com> <4288619.Y3CmtWJjyg@wstn> <55E4671E.5050604@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 71.40.157.251 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/36.0 SeaMonkey/2.33.1) X-Archives-Salt: 1d6518a7-966e-4819-be0c-16c5f12c0d57 X-Archives-Hash: 44100a1a61bbef6d3016be0735ecb42e Alan McKinnon gmail.com> writes: > Ah, an old timer - I forgot that for a second there Both you guys are 'young whipper_snappers.....' > Eventually I gave up trying to clarify that part, but sometimes (like > now) the old habit comes back Both of you have 'fuzzified' the key terms:: "Random vs Sequential" [1,2]. In SSD memory it's a hybrid, referred to as block access; so the issue is still with us, just morphed. hth, James [1] http://kb.sandisk.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/8150/~/difference-between-sequential-and-random-access-operations [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequential_access_memory