memory card loses space over time?

No, I got no responses the first time I posted this, I have checked daily
through my OE newsreader, unless it has a glitch, but thanks to those who
replied.


You just asked this question on July 13th.. Five people
took the time to answer you..

Here is what you wrote along with the answers that were
provided:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?R16651AD8

Yup - Ill second that. I access the NG using Outlook Express and my records
go beyoynd 13 July

I can find no link to your post. Who is faffing about!

IMHO return the card saying it has an unacceptable number of error
correction and lost sectors

When you get your new card

1 - fill it to capacity - observe card details

2 - delete all data from the card (erase)

3 - do #1 and #2 a couple of times and observe any degradations

Cards are a bit like buckets - if a bucket has a leak at 7/8 from the base
you ain't gonna notice until you fill the bucket up

Does this make sense?

Artie

"R. Hamm" wrote in message
news:xlxLc.156290$Oq2.108168@attbi_s52...
No, I got no responses the first time I posted this, I have checked daily
through my OE newsreader, unless it has a glitch, but thanks to those who
replied.


You just asked this question on July 13th.. Five people
took the time to answer you..

Here is what you wrote along with the answers that were
provided:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?R16651AD8

Arte Phacting wrote:

Yup - Ill second that. I access the NG using Outlook Express and my
records go beyoynd 13 July

I can find no link to your post. Who is faffing about!

Then your news server is not getting a full feed, or there was a
hiccup in propagation. Do a search on groups.google.com with the
following parameter:

"group:rec.photo.digital author:R. author:Hamm"

The search returns three primary hits. The one you're not finding
is titled "shrinking mem card Q?". There are five posts to that
thread, including the poster's original question.

BJJB

cheers bjjb

tsk! computers!

now my clock is acting up too

sheesh

Arty

"BillyJoeJimBob" wrote in message
...
Arte Phacting wrote:

Yup - Ill second that. I access the NG using Outlook Express and my
records go beyoynd 13 July

I can find no link to your post. Who is faffing about!

Then your news server is not getting a full feed, or there was a
hiccup in propagation. Do a search on groups.google.com with the
following parameter:

"group:rec.photo.digital author:R. author:Hamm"

The search returns three primary hits. The one you're not finding
is titled "shrinking mem card Q?". There are five posts to that
thread, including the poster's original question.

BJJB

I found the replies under the Google newsgroup in my browser, more
dependable I guess, I will ty re-formatting the card using the camera's menu
tools, now if could figure out why my mouse keeps freezing up!
R. Hamm


"Arty Phacting" wrote in message
...
cheers bjjb

tsk! computers!

now my clock is acting up too

sheesh

Arty

"BillyJoeJimBob" wrote in message
...
Arte Phacting wrote:

Yup - Ill second that. I access the NG using Outlook Express and my
records go beyoynd 13 July

I can find no link to your post. Who is faffing about!

Then your news server is not getting a full feed, or there was a
hiccup in propagation. Do a search on groups.google.com with the
following parameter:

"group:rec.photo.digital author:R. author:Hamm"

The search returns three primary hits. The one you're not finding
is titled "shrinking mem card Q?". There are five posts to that
thread, including the poster's original question.

BJJB

if u have broadband without firewall etc don't worry too much - it may just
be a hacker looking at your data :-)

LOL

Truth is it could be anything

Good luck with the card and mouse

Arty

"R. Hamm" wrote in message
news:jvELc.138306$%_6.113413@attbi_s01...
I found the replies under the Google newsgroup in my browser, more
dependable I guess, I will ty re-formatting the card using the camera's
menu
tools, now if could figure out why my mouse keeps freezing up!
R. Hamm


"Arty Phacting" wrote in message
...
cheers bjjb

tsk! computers!

now my clock is acting up too

sheesh

Arty

"BillyJoeJimBob" wrote in message
...
Arte Phacting wrote:

Yup - Ill second that. I access the NG using Outlook Express and my
records go beyoynd 13 July

I can find no link to your post. Who is faffing about!

Then your news server is not getting a full feed, or there was a
hiccup in propagation. Do a search on groups.google.com with the
following parameter:

"group:rec.photo.digital author:R. author:Hamm"

The search returns three primary hits. The one you're not finding
is titled "shrinking mem card Q?". There are five posts to that
thread, including the poster's original question.

BJJB

R. Hamm writes:

I hear that the more you use a photo card, the less it holds, why is this?

It's not the case. Space on the card can become fragmented, but proper
software can recover that. The actual capacity of the card never
diminishes.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

"Arte Phacting" wrote in message ...
This sounds reasonable - as far as the original poser is concerned does
he/she have a claim to having a faulty card as the error correction is
kicking in at too high a rate?
....
I hear that the more you use a photo card, the less it holds, why
is this?
....
Most Compact Flash cards (and probably memory sticks, secure digital,
and the rest) have built-in error detection and remapping. If a spot
on the card dies from age or use, it is detected and mapped out of
the writeable area on the card. That way you don't end up writing
part of an image onto a non-retrievable portion of the card. As a
card ages and develops more dead spots, the amount of storage
available drops.
....

(This is based on my experience with CF cards and investigations into wear leveling for
a high usage application...)

While this might sound reasonable, it is not the way flash memory is designed. Unlike hard
drives (where the entire area is used at the beginning), flash memories have a "spares" pool
in excess of the stated size. As areas of memory fail, the failed areas are mapped to
members of the spares pool. The device does not "fail" or loose capacity until the spares
pool is exhausted. Even for commercial (versus military) devices, this shouldn't happen
in normal user life times.

(The application I was investigating wrote the entire card every 6 minutes or so, continuously
for days. We were able to "wear out" the flash memory, but it took days.)

The two most likely explanations a
1. The original claim is an urban legend. (My belief from my own experiences both with
cameras and commercial applications.)
2. The camera or computer is leaving old files on the device. A format of the card (preferably
in the camera to avoid format mistakes by the user) should always return the device
to its original capacity.
3. An actual case of early failure of a device has erroneously been extrapolated as usual
device behavior.


--
Dan (Woj...) dmaster at lucent dot com
----------------------------------
"What can you see / On the horizon?
Why do the white gulls call?
Across the sea / A pale moon rises.
The ships have come / To carry you home.
And all will turn to silver glass.
A light on the water / All souls pass."

In message , Dan Wojciechowski
writes
"Arte Phacting" wrote in message
...
This sounds reasonable - as far as the original poser is concerned does
he/she have a claim to having a faulty card as the error correction is
kicking in at too high a rate?
...
I hear that the more you use a photo card, the less it holds, why
is this?
...
Most Compact Flash cards (and probably memory sticks, secure digital,
and the rest) have built-in error detection and remapping. If a spot
on the card dies from age or use, it is detected and mapped out of
the writeable area on the card. That way you don't end up writing
part of an image onto a non-retrievable portion of the card. As a
card ages and develops more dead spots, the amount of storage
available drops.
...

(This is based on my experience with CF cards and investigations into
wear leveling for
a high usage application...)

While this might sound reasonable, it is not the way flash memory is
designed. Unlike hard
drives (where the entire area is used at the beginning), flash memories
have a "spares" pool
in excess of the stated size. As areas of memory fail, the failed
areas are mapped to
members of the spares pool. The device does not "fail" or loose
capacity until the spares
pool is exhausted. Even for commercial (versus military) devices, this
shouldn't happen
in normal user life times.

(The application I was investigating wrote the entire card every 6
minutes or so, continuously
for days. We were able to "wear out" the flash memory, but it took days.)

The two most likely explanations a
1. The original claim is an urban legend. (My belief from my own
experiences both with
cameras and commercial applications.)
2. The camera or computer is leaving old files on the device. A format
of the card (preferably
in the camera to avoid format mistakes by the user) should always
return the device
to its original capacity.
3. An actual case of early failure of a device has erroneously been
extrapolated as usual
device behavior.

All the ones I have ever seen that have "lost" capacity had been mounted
and/or browsed by "clever" applications that leave large thumbnail index
files. eg. PSPro *.jbf, XP *.db These can gradually accumulate in
subdirectories.

As you said, a reformat in the camera should restore full capacity
again.

Regards,
--
Martin Brown

I wonder if we are in the process of replacing one urban myth with another?

Is there not a hard & fast test method - an ISO standard on memory chips?

Arty

ps - Dan, way to go mate

A

"Martin Brown" wrote in message
...
In message , Dan Wojciechowski
writes
"Arte Phacting" wrote in message
...
This sounds reasonable - as far as the original poser is concerned does
he/she have a claim to having a faulty card as the error correction is
kicking in at too high a rate?
...
I hear that the more you use a photo card, the less it holds, why
is this?
...
Most Compact Flash cards (and probably memory sticks, secure digital,
and the rest) have built-in error detection and remapping. If a spot
on the card dies from age or use, it is detected and mapped out of
the writeable area on the card. That way you don't end up writing
part of an image onto a non-retrievable portion of the card. As a
card ages and develops more dead spots, the amount of storage
available drops.
...

(This is based on my experience with CF cards and investigations into
wear leveling for
a high usage application...)

While this might sound reasonable, it is not the way flash memory is
designed. Unlike hard
drives (where the entire area is used at the beginning), flash memories
have a "spares" pool
in excess of the stated size. As areas of memory fail, the failed
areas are mapped to
members of the spares pool. The device does not "fail" or loose
capacity until the spares
pool is exhausted. Even for commercial (versus military) devices, this
shouldn't happen
in normal user life times.

(The application I was investigating wrote the entire card every 6
minutes or so, continuously
for days. We were able to "wear out" the flash memory, but it took
days.)

The two most likely explanations a
1. The original claim is an urban legend. (My belief from my own
experiences both with
cameras and commercial applications.)
2. The camera or computer is leaving old files on the device. A format
of the card (preferably
in the camera to avoid format mistakes by the user) should always
return the device
to its original capacity.
3. An actual case of early failure of a device has erroneously been
extrapolated as usual
device behavior.

All the ones I have ever seen that have "lost" capacity had been mounted
and/or browsed by "clever" applications that leave large thumbnail index
files. eg. PSPro *.jbf, XP *.db These can gradually accumulate in
subdirectories.

As you said, a reformat in the camera should restore full capacity
again.

Regards,
--
Martin Brown