I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
fitted in a PC.

I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it up?

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Every day is a good day for chicken, unless you're a chicken.

On 29 Jul 2022 at 14:30:43 BST, ""Jeff Gaines""
<jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>
> I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
> access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
> fitted in a PC.
>
> I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
> perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it up?

Yup. Open it up and hammer a punch at the centre of each of the larger
chips to shatter/bend them. The actual data substrate is very fragile
once the package is damaged, and the data is interleaved across all the
flash chips so any one being cracked gives sufficient coverage really.

Cheers - Jaimie
--
"It's made of people?"
"There's already a drink like that - Soylent Cola."
"How does it taste?"
"It varies from person to person." -- Fry and Leela

In article <xn0nkxwpgky9hpc016@news.individual.net>, Jeff Gaines wrote...
>
> I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
> access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
> fitted in a PC.
>
> I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
> perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it up?

I believe some data recovery services (e.g. Fields) will attempt to recover
data from an SSD, if you're concerned there might be something irreplaceable on
it. Generally, when SSDs go, they go completely, without the warning you can
get from SMART monitors on a spinner, so backup's all the more important!

--

Phil, London

On 30/07/2022 in message
<MPG.3d4e0edb7e5a21f8989a07@news.eternal-september.org> Philip Herlihy
wrote:

>In article <xn0nkxwpgky9hpc016@news.individual.net>, Jeff Gaines wrote...
>>
>>I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
>>access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
>>fitted in a PC.
>>
>>I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
>>perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it
>>up?
>
>I believe some data recovery services (e.g. Fields) will attempt to recover
>data from an SSD, if you're concerned there might be something
>irreplaceable on
>it. Generally, when SSDs go, they go completely, without the warning you
>can
>get from SMART monitors on a spinner, so backup's all the more important!

Many thanks Jaimie and Phil :-)

I took the cover off (and kept the screws, they're like gold dust) then
just snapped each chip in half. All backed up so nothing to worry about
and, as Phil said, it just went, no warning.

First one I've had fail, even my original Intel 180 GB are still gong
strong.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
640k ought to be enough for anyone.
(Bill Gates, 1981)

In article <xn0nkz8t5maf92w018@news.individual.net>, Jeff Gaines wrote...
>
> On 30/07/2022 in message
> <MPG.3d4e0edb7e5a21f8989a07@news.eternal-september.org> Philip Herlihy
> wrote:
>
> >In article <xn0nkxwpgky9hpc016@news.individual.net>, Jeff Gaines wrote...
> >>
> >>I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
> >>access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
> >>fitted in a PC.
> >>
> >>I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
> >>perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it
> >>up?
> >
> >I believe some data recovery services (e.g. Fields) will attempt to recover
> >data from an SSD, if you're concerned there might be something
> >irreplaceable on
> >it. Generally, when SSDs go, they go completely, without the warning you
> >can
> >get from SMART monitors on a spinner, so backup's all the more important!
>
> Many thanks Jaimie and Phil :-)
>
> I took the cover off (and kept the screws, they're like gold dust) then
> just snapped each chip in half. All backed up so nothing to worry about
> and, as Phil said, it just went, no warning.
>
> First one I've had fail, even my original Intel 180 GB are still gong
> strong.

I chose to increase the cost of a fancy laptop by over £400 in 2010 to have a
256GB SSD instead of the normal spinner. It lasted just over a year!

Moral: don't be an early adopter!

--

Phil, London

On 30/07/2022 13:21, Philip Herlihy wrote:
> In article <xn0nkz8t5maf92w018@news.individual.net>, Jeff Gaines wrote...
>>
>> On 30/07/2022 in message
>> <MPG.3d4e0edb7e5a21f8989a07@news.eternal-september.org> Philip Herlihy
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <xn0nkxwpgky9hpc016@news.individual.net>, Jeff Gaines wrote...
>>>>
>>>> I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
>>>> access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
>>>> fitted in a PC.
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
>>>> perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it
>>>> up?
>>>
>>> I believe some data recovery services (e.g. Fields) will attempt to recover
>>> data from an SSD, if you're concerned there might be something
>>> irreplaceable on
>>> it. Generally, when SSDs go, they go completely, without the warning you
>>> can
>>> get from SMART monitors on a spinner, so backup's all the more important!
>>
>> Many thanks Jaimie and Phil :-)
>>
>> I took the cover off (and kept the screws, they're like gold dust) then
>> just snapped each chip in half. All backed up so nothing to worry about
>> and, as Phil said, it just went, no warning.
>>
>> First one I've had fail, even my original Intel 180 GB are still gong
>> strong.
>
> I chose to increase the cost of a fancy laptop by over £400 in 2010 to have a
> 256GB SSD instead of the normal spinner. It lasted just over a year!
>
> Moral: don't be an early adopter!
>

They were much faster, are you sure you wouldn't do exactly the same,
even if you knew it would only last a year?

FWIW, My first SSD from 2009 is still working. Apart from numerous OCZs,
which I started buying in 2011, all my SSDs, still work.

On 29/07/2022 21:11, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
> On 29 Jul 2022 at 14:30:43 BST, ""Jeff Gaines""
> <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
>> access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
>> fitted in a PC.
>>
>> I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
>> perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it up?
>
> Yup. Open it up and hammer a punch at the centre of each of the larger
> chips to shatter/bend them. The actual data substrate is very fragile
> once the package is damaged, and the data is interleaved across all the
> flash chips so any one being cracked gives sufficient coverage really.

How worthwhile is that for most ordinary people?

Here's a drive that can't be read simply by plugging it in. Is anyone
really going to spend a load of money on 'data recovering' this drive,
assuming they find it somewhere in your bin?

>
> Cheers - Jaimie

On 30 Jul 2022 at 13:38:24 BST, Pancho wrote:

> FWIW, My first SSD from 2009 is still working. Apart from numerous OCZs,
> which I started buying in 2011, all my SSDs, still work.

Yes same here, an Intel, marvelluoos thing. And my only failure is an OCZ from
a while back.

--
Cheers, Rob

On 30 Jul 2022 at 14:10:27 BST, "GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid>
wrote:

> On 29/07/2022 21:11, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
>> On 29 Jul 2022 at 14:30:43 BST, ""Jeff Gaines""
>> <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
>>> access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
>>> fitted in a PC.
>>>
>>> I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
>>> perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it up?
>>
>> Yup. Open it up and hammer a punch at the centre of each of the larger
>> chips to shatter/bend them. The actual data substrate is very fragile
>> once the package is damaged, and the data is interleaved across all the
>> flash chips so any one being cracked gives sufficient coverage really.
>
> How worthwhile is that for most ordinary people?

Shrug. Jeff wanted to. Only takes a minute or so. Why not?

Cheers - Jaimie
--
"The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean
by infinity is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity."
-- Voltaire

On 30/07/2022 21:17, RJH wrote:
> On 30 Jul 2022 at 13:38:24 BST, Pancho wrote:
>
>> FWIW, My first SSD from 2009 is still working. Apart from numerous OCZs,
>> which I started buying in 2011, all my SSDs, still work.
>
> Yes same here, an Intel, marvelluoos thing. And my only failure is an OCZ from
> a while back.
>

For heavy users, does anyone obey over provisioning recommendations for
SSD reliability?

--
Adrian C

On 31/07/2022 03:28, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
> On 30 Jul 2022 at 14:10:27 BST, "GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 29/07/2022 21:11, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
>>> On 29 Jul 2022 at 14:30:43 BST, ""Jeff Gaines""
>>> <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've just had my first SSD fail I think. It's a Crucial M4 512 GB. I can't
>>>> access it via any of the cables/connectors/caddies I have nor if it's
>>>> fitted in a PC.
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea what's on it and I can't format it as it's not recognised,
>>>> perhaps best to dismantle it, see what's inside and physically break it up?
>>>
>>> Yup. Open it up and hammer a punch at the centre of each of the larger
>>> chips to shatter/bend them. The actual data substrate is very fragile
>>> once the package is damaged, and the data is interleaved across all the
>>> flash chips so any one being cracked gives sufficient coverage really.
>>
>> How worthwhile is that for most ordinary people?
>
> Shrug. Jeff wanted to. Only takes a minute or so. Why not?
>
> Cheers - Jaimie

I just hit old disks (hard!) with a big hammer. Perhaps I'm paranoid,
but I think that anyone with the resources and inclination to read that
maltreated disk probably already knows what's on my PC. :)

On 31/07/2022 06:54, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
> On 30/07/2022 21:17, RJH wrote:
>> On 30 Jul 2022 at 13:38:24 BST, Pancho wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW, My first SSD from 2009 is still working. Apart from numerous OCZs,
>>> which I started buying in 2011, all my SSDs, still work.
>>
>> Yes same here, an Intel, marvelluoos thing. And my only failure is an
>> OCZ from
>> a while back.
>>
>
> For heavy users, does anyone obey over provisioning recommendations for
> SSD reliability?
>

I use RAID1 (aside from backup). However, I'm inclined to think that I'm
missing a trick, because I buy my SSDs in pairs from the same
manufacturer. Should I be buying completely different SSDs? In RAID1,
that means the speed will be governed by the slower disc. On the other
hand, they are less likely to both fail at more or less the same time?

Never had an SSD fail yet, btw.

On 2022-07-31, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:
> On 31/07/2022 06:54, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
>> On 30/07/2022 21:17, RJH wrote:
>>> On 30 Jul 2022 at 13:38:24 BST, Pancho wrote:
>>>
>>>> FWIW, My first SSD from 2009 is still working. Apart from numerous OCZs,
>>>> which I started buying in 2011, all my SSDs, still work.
>>>
>>> Yes same here, an Intel, marvelluoos thing. And my only failure is an
>>> OCZ from
>>> a while back.
>>>
>>
>> For heavy users, does anyone obey over provisioning recommendations for
>> SSD reliability?
>>
>
>
> I use RAID1 (aside from backup). However, I'm inclined to think that I'm
> missing a trick, because I buy my SSDs in pairs from the same
> manufacturer. Should I be buying completely different SSDs? In RAID1,
> that means the speed will be governed by the slower disc. On the other
> hand, they are less likely to both fail at more or less the same time?

If one disk fails ins a RAID it is important that the remainung disk(s) in
the raid do not fail before the raid has been rebuilt.

Two new disks in RAID1 are likely to fail about the same time. Say if one is
20% worn out when inserted into RAID1, when it fails first there will be
enough life in the second, newer, disk to allow the RAID to be rebuilt.

Of course a great set of backups, and that there is no problem with down
time, is the counter arguement.

>
> Never had an SSD fail yet, btw.

On 01/08/2022 02:19, Gordon wrote:
> Two new disks in RAID1 are likely to fail about the same time. Say if one is
> 20% worn out when inserted into RAID1, when it fails first there will be
> enough life in the second, newer, disk to allow the RAID to be rebuilt.

On installation, handle some a bit more roughly than the others, to give
them a better bit of time spread between dying events.

Ya know it makes sense ;-)

--
Adrian C