Does constant writing to “files” in `/proc` or `/sys` reduce the life of my SSD due to its limited number...











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












My laptop has a SSD drive and I run a script which writes every other second to /sys/class/thermal/cooling_device4/cur_state. I don't think this would count as writing to the SSD and thus reducing its remaining number of writing cycles, since procfs and sysfs are virtual filesystems.



Or am I overlooking something and this is an issue?










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    You are right. Not writing to the SSD doesn't count as writing to the SSD. The same would hold for a RAM drive such as tmpfs.
    – glglgl
    15 hours ago















up vote
0
down vote

favorite












My laptop has a SSD drive and I run a script which writes every other second to /sys/class/thermal/cooling_device4/cur_state. I don't think this would count as writing to the SSD and thus reducing its remaining number of writing cycles, since procfs and sysfs are virtual filesystems.



Or am I overlooking something and this is an issue?










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    You are right. Not writing to the SSD doesn't count as writing to the SSD. The same would hold for a RAM drive such as tmpfs.
    – glglgl
    15 hours ago













up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite











My laptop has a SSD drive and I run a script which writes every other second to /sys/class/thermal/cooling_device4/cur_state. I don't think this would count as writing to the SSD and thus reducing its remaining number of writing cycles, since procfs and sysfs are virtual filesystems.



Or am I overlooking something and this is an issue?










share|improve this question













My laptop has a SSD drive and I run a script which writes every other second to /sys/class/thermal/cooling_device4/cur_state. I don't think this would count as writing to the SSD and thus reducing its remaining number of writing cycles, since procfs and sysfs are virtual filesystems.



Or am I overlooking something and this is an issue?







linux files filesystems proc ssd






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 16 hours ago









Jayjayyy

1658




1658








  • 1




    You are right. Not writing to the SSD doesn't count as writing to the SSD. The same would hold for a RAM drive such as tmpfs.
    – glglgl
    15 hours ago














  • 1




    You are right. Not writing to the SSD doesn't count as writing to the SSD. The same would hold for a RAM drive such as tmpfs.
    – glglgl
    15 hours ago








1




1




You are right. Not writing to the SSD doesn't count as writing to the SSD. The same would hold for a RAM drive such as tmpfs.
– glglgl
15 hours ago




You are right. Not writing to the SSD doesn't count as writing to the SSD. The same would hold for a RAM drive such as tmpfs.
– glglgl
15 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
5
down vote



accepted










You're entirely correct: virtual filesystems like procfs and sysfs are not stored on disk at all. Their contents are generated on-demand based on kernel data structures in RAM, and writing into them (if possible at all) translates into making changes to in-memory kernel settings.



Writing to procfs or sysfs cannot possibly have any impact to SSD lifetime.






share|improve this answer





















  • But if I'm nit-picking, is that possible writing to /sys control the state of your SSD controller so it will have some impact to the hardware?
    – 神秘德里克
    15 hours ago










  • No, repeated writing to /sys/class/thermal (as the original poster asked) won't have any impact to SSD hardware :-) To have any significant effect, you would have to write into /sys/block/<device name>/ and basically deliberately pick the worst possible settings for a SSD. Even so, modern consumer SSDs have plenty of writing cycles and efficient wear leveling: typically the vendors promise that you could write more than a terabyte every day and the SSD would still have the expected lifetime. Of course, sometimes those promises can be mistaken or less than truthful otherwise...
    – telcoM
    15 hours ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f486750%2fdoes-constant-writing-to-files-in-proc-or-sys-reduce-the-life-of-my-ssd%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
5
down vote



accepted










You're entirely correct: virtual filesystems like procfs and sysfs are not stored on disk at all. Their contents are generated on-demand based on kernel data structures in RAM, and writing into them (if possible at all) translates into making changes to in-memory kernel settings.



Writing to procfs or sysfs cannot possibly have any impact to SSD lifetime.






share|improve this answer





















  • But if I'm nit-picking, is that possible writing to /sys control the state of your SSD controller so it will have some impact to the hardware?
    – 神秘德里克
    15 hours ago










  • No, repeated writing to /sys/class/thermal (as the original poster asked) won't have any impact to SSD hardware :-) To have any significant effect, you would have to write into /sys/block/<device name>/ and basically deliberately pick the worst possible settings for a SSD. Even so, modern consumer SSDs have plenty of writing cycles and efficient wear leveling: typically the vendors promise that you could write more than a terabyte every day and the SSD would still have the expected lifetime. Of course, sometimes those promises can be mistaken or less than truthful otherwise...
    – telcoM
    15 hours ago















up vote
5
down vote



accepted










You're entirely correct: virtual filesystems like procfs and sysfs are not stored on disk at all. Their contents are generated on-demand based on kernel data structures in RAM, and writing into them (if possible at all) translates into making changes to in-memory kernel settings.



Writing to procfs or sysfs cannot possibly have any impact to SSD lifetime.






share|improve this answer





















  • But if I'm nit-picking, is that possible writing to /sys control the state of your SSD controller so it will have some impact to the hardware?
    – 神秘德里克
    15 hours ago










  • No, repeated writing to /sys/class/thermal (as the original poster asked) won't have any impact to SSD hardware :-) To have any significant effect, you would have to write into /sys/block/<device name>/ and basically deliberately pick the worst possible settings for a SSD. Even so, modern consumer SSDs have plenty of writing cycles and efficient wear leveling: typically the vendors promise that you could write more than a terabyte every day and the SSD would still have the expected lifetime. Of course, sometimes those promises can be mistaken or less than truthful otherwise...
    – telcoM
    15 hours ago













up vote
5
down vote



accepted







up vote
5
down vote



accepted






You're entirely correct: virtual filesystems like procfs and sysfs are not stored on disk at all. Their contents are generated on-demand based on kernel data structures in RAM, and writing into them (if possible at all) translates into making changes to in-memory kernel settings.



Writing to procfs or sysfs cannot possibly have any impact to SSD lifetime.






share|improve this answer












You're entirely correct: virtual filesystems like procfs and sysfs are not stored on disk at all. Their contents are generated on-demand based on kernel data structures in RAM, and writing into them (if possible at all) translates into making changes to in-memory kernel settings.



Writing to procfs or sysfs cannot possibly have any impact to SSD lifetime.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 16 hours ago









telcoM

15.2k12143




15.2k12143












  • But if I'm nit-picking, is that possible writing to /sys control the state of your SSD controller so it will have some impact to the hardware?
    – 神秘德里克
    15 hours ago










  • No, repeated writing to /sys/class/thermal (as the original poster asked) won't have any impact to SSD hardware :-) To have any significant effect, you would have to write into /sys/block/<device name>/ and basically deliberately pick the worst possible settings for a SSD. Even so, modern consumer SSDs have plenty of writing cycles and efficient wear leveling: typically the vendors promise that you could write more than a terabyte every day and the SSD would still have the expected lifetime. Of course, sometimes those promises can be mistaken or less than truthful otherwise...
    – telcoM
    15 hours ago


















  • But if I'm nit-picking, is that possible writing to /sys control the state of your SSD controller so it will have some impact to the hardware?
    – 神秘德里克
    15 hours ago










  • No, repeated writing to /sys/class/thermal (as the original poster asked) won't have any impact to SSD hardware :-) To have any significant effect, you would have to write into /sys/block/<device name>/ and basically deliberately pick the worst possible settings for a SSD. Even so, modern consumer SSDs have plenty of writing cycles and efficient wear leveling: typically the vendors promise that you could write more than a terabyte every day and the SSD would still have the expected lifetime. Of course, sometimes those promises can be mistaken or less than truthful otherwise...
    – telcoM
    15 hours ago
















But if I'm nit-picking, is that possible writing to /sys control the state of your SSD controller so it will have some impact to the hardware?
– 神秘德里克
15 hours ago




But if I'm nit-picking, is that possible writing to /sys control the state of your SSD controller so it will have some impact to the hardware?
– 神秘德里克
15 hours ago












No, repeated writing to /sys/class/thermal (as the original poster asked) won't have any impact to SSD hardware :-) To have any significant effect, you would have to write into /sys/block/<device name>/ and basically deliberately pick the worst possible settings for a SSD. Even so, modern consumer SSDs have plenty of writing cycles and efficient wear leveling: typically the vendors promise that you could write more than a terabyte every day and the SSD would still have the expected lifetime. Of course, sometimes those promises can be mistaken or less than truthful otherwise...
– telcoM
15 hours ago




No, repeated writing to /sys/class/thermal (as the original poster asked) won't have any impact to SSD hardware :-) To have any significant effect, you would have to write into /sys/block/<device name>/ and basically deliberately pick the worst possible settings for a SSD. Even so, modern consumer SSDs have plenty of writing cycles and efficient wear leveling: typically the vendors promise that you could write more than a terabyte every day and the SSD would still have the expected lifetime. Of course, sometimes those promises can be mistaken or less than truthful otherwise...
– telcoM
15 hours ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f486750%2fdoes-constant-writing-to-files-in-proc-or-sys-reduce-the-life-of-my-ssd%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Morgemoulin

Scott Moir

Souastre