I assume 7 days is worst-case scenario, corporate-level drive quality (which is lower than consumer-grade) plus high temperature?
Is it becoming necessary to switch to a filesystem that ensures data integrity with redundancy and regular checksums?
Is it becoming necessary to switch to a filesystem that ensures data integrity with redundancy and regular checksums?
Filesystems are not magic data restoration fairies. Checksums just tell you when your data is gone; they don't bring it back. Always mirror or erasure-encode, and store mirrored pairs in separate locations.
I presume it is assumed that corporate policy has better data integrity best practices than your average Joe Homeowner.
With this I'm actually surprised that the SSD's lasted as much as they did, for about 6 years now I've been using SSD's and the longest one of them survived so far is less than 18 months, and at much lower loads than what they've tested in. Since late 2008 I've been always running 2 SSD's for my main system drive in raid 0 with no much load on them other than games, some work stuff and the OS. At any point in which the drive has no more spare blocks to relocate failed blocks too i toss it away and replace it (if read errors come close to critical i do the same). For the first couple of years the SSD's only lasted for about a year(my first Intel pair lasted something like 5 months, but those were shitty controllers), this time with the Samsung 840 EVO's i have a feeling that they might actually last the whole 2 year span of my desktop.
The SSD is in fact better because it better uses its internal resources to optimize for things other than retention without power.