<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>STRAW: A Stress-Aware WL-Based Read Reclaim Technique for High-Density NAND Flash-Based SSDs · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2501.02517/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2501.02517/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>STRAW: A Stress-Aware WL-Based Read Reclaim Technique for High-Density NAND Flash-Based SSDs — mentioned by petu</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49166695</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2501.02517:49166695</guid><pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2026 10:40:11 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Hm, I asked 5.6 Sol to calculate/research and it came up with way less optimistic lifespan than Gemini (that I&amp;#x27;ve asked last year). It claims that each individual page read induces read disturb across whole block. And references https://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.02517 that tested Samsung 3D TLC and found ~518K sequential page reads in a block to be ECC threshold (although it&amp;#x27;s unclear how they got 518K number -- e.g. is it single worst chip they&amp;#x27;ve tried? authors brings up 160 chip sample size later on). With 7704 pages in a block that&amp;#x27;s only ~70 sequential block reads till data is lost and to…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2501.02517/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AR</category></item></channel></rss>
