[Soekris] arguments for ADDing flash to an hdd-based system?

[Tenzen]

> Just want to get some feedback from you guys then, do you normally leave
> a HDD in a soekris box, are these boxes doing that many frequent writes that
> can't be buffered in RAM?

It's interesting to read the uses/approaches to use of flash.

>From an ops (effort+$$$) standpoint, having given some thought to the
approaches here, I'm leaning towards a 'standard' roll-out of soekris
+ 'just' hdd. The $$$ of HDDs is low enough for us to consider them
consumables as well.  And, with a properly set up & secured tftp/nfs
service, a remote user -- even over a 'slow' wire/net -- can quite
easily start a scripted install, leave it overnight, and have a
fully-functioning 'plain vanilla' *BSD in the morning.

I'd consider putting flash + nanobsd in admins'/tech-users' boxes on
request ... but see it as a nice-to-have.  In the case of a dead HDD,
since we back up our remote boxes with bacula anyway, it's just as
easy to swap a 'fresh' drive in and restore as to boot from flash &
repair.  Yes, there are shades-of-gray to the args.

--Tenzen