[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "C. Falconer" <cfalconer at avonside dot school dot nz>
 To:  'kagaku' <kagaku at gmail dot com>, m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] CF vs Hard disk
 Date:  Wed, 24 Nov 2004 11:32:38 +1300
Bugger all effective difference.

The CF card looks like a HDD to the BIOS/OS so theres no real difference
other than the size.

I use an 8 Mb CF card (which was free cos its uselessly small for a camera)
inside an IDE/CF adapter ($30 NZ) and it works fine.  A hard drive would be
at least hundreds of Mb, mostly unused.  

A HDD is also noisier and more liable to fail on you (but still more
reliable than a floppy and CDROM)

I recall that m0n0wall runs entirely from ram, so after loading theres no
disk access beyond updating the config.xml file when you make a change.

-----Original Message-----
From: kagaku [mailto:kagaku at gmail dot com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 24 November 2004 10:58 a.m.
To: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Subject: [m0n0wall] CF vs Hard disk


Compared to a hard drive, how is the performance of m0n0wall when running
off a CF card attached to an IDE adapter? I'm currently using a hard drive
for m0n0wall, but it's dying (click of death, yay..), and I'm considering
buying a CF IDE adapter since I already have a few CF cards laying around.
Power going out often is an issue, how are boot times compared to a hard
drive? Also, how responsive is the web interface?

-kagaku