If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
"Drew" wrote in message ... On 3/14/2015 2:11 AM, Paul wrote: Yousuf Khan wrote: Sadly This 10TB Hard Drive Is Designed For Servers, Not Your Laptop http://gizmodo.com/sadly-this-10tb-h...not-1691245306 Hitachi Global Storage Technologies—aka HGST, aka a subsidiary of Western Digital—was recently showing off its gigantic new 10TB hard drive at the Linux Foundation Vault tradeshow in Boston. But unfortunately you won't be packing 10,000 gigabytes into your laptop anytime soon because the drive is designed for use in servers, and mostly because it requires special software to work. Originally revealed back in September of last year, HGST will finally be shipping its 10TB SMR HelioSeal HDD sometime in the second quarter of this year. But the drive will require special updates to an OS like Linux in order for a server to actually be able to read and write to it thanks to the radical new storage technologies it employs. The HelioSeal technology simply means the drive is actually pumped full of helium to help reduce friction between the read/write heads and the platter which allows HGST to squeeze more platters inside since there's less heat to have to deal with. It's the SMR technology that poses the software problems. SMR stands for Shingled Magnetic Recording and it basically describes how data is written to the platters. In a traditional hard drive the data is written in thin lines with a tiny gap in-between each one to help minimize corruption. It's similar to how grooves of music are laid out on a vinyl record. With SMR those data tracks slightly overlap instead, like waterproof shingles on the roof of a home. There are no longer any gaps in-between each track which allows more data to be stored on a single platter, but at the cost of more complicated software on the OS to properly read, write, and over-write data without destroying neighboring tracks. It sounds complicated, and it is, which is why HGST's new 10TB drive has been slow to come to market. Everyone involved wants to make sure the technology and supporting software works perfectly to avoid disastrous data loss. But there's no reason to think the technology won't be ready for desktop PCs and eventually laptops in a few years. Who needs that cloud anyways? http://www.storagereview.com/seagate...hdd_review_8tb "SMR drives are not designed to cope with sustained write behavior" "We found large sustained backup tasks to take longer than a traditional PMR HDD, averaging about 30MB/s" "The SMR drives took much longer for a traditional full backup, averaging 30MB/s. However we saw sustained read speeds during a 400GB VM recovery in excess of 180MB/s, which is really the core metric. " It's possible the slightly smaller drives are not affected like that. Some of the 6TB ones are OK. I saw a review comparing a few products in the 6TB range, and they had decent sustained numbers (for home users who care about such things). This isn't that review, but it'll have to do. It's for a Seagate 6TB drive, with numbers over 200MB/sec for large enough block size operations. http://www.overclockersclub.com/revi...4_review/4.htm If you have external disk enclosures, some of the new disks have a different hole pattern on the bottom, so for drives that are held into place with screws from the bottom, only two screws will mate. I think home users will be staying "one step behind the curve", to get the best possible secondary storage. SSD for C:, conventional (non-SMR) secondary storage. The flying height, the last time I checked, was 3nm. HGST is experimenting with zero flying height. If you thought your old drives seemed to have a "wear phenomenon", we're just getting started. The experimental zero flying height setup HGST used, lasted one month before the head was ruined. But they'll figure it out eventually. I'm crossing my fingers and hoping my current set of drives last a long time. I'm very happy to not have 30MB/sec writes. Why would a home user need 10,000 gigabytes of storage? I've already got that, just not in a single drive, mostly for the PVR overflow that I haven't got around to watching yet. By the time you fill it something new would come along or it would die first. That isn't what happened with the 10TB+ I already have. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 05:39:04 -0700, Drew wrote:
This was going to be my reply: MY PLAN Why would a home user need 10,000 gigabytes of storage? By the time you fill it something new would come along or it or the user would die first. /MY PLAN but before doing it I read the other replies. Obviously I didn't realize what some users' needs are. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
On 3/14/2015 7:11 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 05:39:04 -0700, Drew wrote: This was going to be my reply: MY PLAN Why would a home user need 10,000 gigabytes of storage? By the time you fill it something new would come along or it or the user would die first. /MY PLAN but before doing it I read the other replies. Obviously I didn't realize what some users' needs are. Just think of what a backup would take! |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
On 14/03/2015 8:39 AM, Drew wrote:
Why would a home user need 10,000 gigabytes of storage? By the time you fill it something new would come along or it would die first. I'm pretty close to that amount if I count all internal drives and external USB drives too. Yousuf Khan |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
On 14/03/2015 8:49 AM, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , Yousuf Khan escribió: but at the cost of more complicated software on the OS to properly read, write, and over-write data without destroying neighboring tracks. This is bull****. The OS has nothing to do with it, the drive firmware does it and this process is invisible to the OS. Maybe the special write procedures for these drives can't be fully handled by the drive firmware, and so it needs an assist by the OS? It wouldn't surprise me if the write timing operation is so complex that it's best handled by a subroutine that can only run on the host machine. The host machine would have better understanding of the high-level file system data structures, which the firmware wouldn't understand. Perhaps it's best to not consider these hard drives but something between a hard drive and a tape drive? Yousuf Khan |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 04:38:39 -0400, Charlie wrote:
On 3/14/2015 7:11 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 05:39:04 -0700, Drew wrote: This was going to be my reply: MY PLAN Why would a home user need 10,000 gigabytes of storage? By the time you fill it something new would come along or it or the user would die first. /MY PLAN but before doing it I read the other replies. Obviously I didn't realize what some users' needs are. Just think of what a backup would take! Another 10T disk? Unless I messed up the arithmetic, that's about a day or two to do a complete backup. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 04:38:39 -0400, Charlie wrote:
On 3/14/2015 7:11 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 05:39:04 -0700, Drew wrote: This was going to be my reply: MY PLAN Why would a home user need 10,000 gigabytes of storage? By the time you fill it something new would come along or it or the user would die first. /MY PLAN but before doing it I read the other replies. Obviously I didn't realize what some users' needs are. Just think of what a backup would take! I have a total of about 50TB here, consisting of two volumes, (using Drive Bender), and made the decision long ago that I wouldn't be backing up all of it under any circumstances. Instead, you decide what needs to be backed up and do it selectively, and the rest either gets protected with parity so that you can lose a drive or two and still recover, or you simply decide to ride bareback and treat the data as expendable or replaceable. -- Char Jackson |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
Char Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 04:38:39 -0400, Charlie wrote: On 3/14/2015 7:11 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 05:39:04 -0700, Drew wrote: This was going to be my reply: MY PLAN Why would a home user need 10,000 gigabytes of storage? By the time you fill it something new would come along or it or the user would die first. /MY PLAN but before doing it I read the other replies. Obviously I didn't realize what some users' needs are. Just think of what a backup would take! I have a total of about 50TB here, consisting of two volumes, (using Drive Bender), and made the decision long ago that I wouldn't be backing up all of it under any circumstances. Instead, you decide what needs to be backed up and do it selectively, and the rest either gets protected with parity so that you can lose a drive or two and still recover, or you simply decide to ride bareback and treat the data as expendable or replaceable. How unhappy would you be, if you lost the entire array ? Common mode failures do happen. All it takes is a power supply failure, the 12V rail rising to 15V for around 30 seconds, and it's all over for your array. ******* One problem I see with that 10TB drive, is it's not going to fit into the typical IT guys "backup window value". You'd be surprised how important that is to some people. I'm also surprised there's no "reach" program at Seagate or WD, to change the basics of hard drive design. And crank up the bandwidth. If you're going to make a 10TB drive, it should have 500MB/sec bandwidth. They should at least have enough heads, to write the entire shingle in one pass. Paul |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
10TB Hard Drive, can't even be accessed by modern OS's yet!
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 11:58:32 -0400, Paul wrote:
Char Jackson wrote: On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 04:38:39 -0400, Charlie wrote: On 3/14/2015 7:11 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 05:39:04 -0700, Drew wrote: This was going to be my reply: MY PLAN Why would a home user need 10,000 gigabytes of storage? By the time you fill it something new would come along or it or the user would die first. /MY PLAN but before doing it I read the other replies. Obviously I didn't realize what some users' needs are. Just think of what a backup would take! I have a total of about 50TB here, consisting of two volumes, (using Drive Bender), and made the decision long ago that I wouldn't be backing up all of it under any circumstances. Instead, you decide what needs to be backed up and do it selectively, and the rest either gets protected with parity so that you can lose a drive or two and still recover, or you simply decide to ride bareback and treat the data as expendable or replaceable. How unhappy would you be, if you lost the entire array ? Common mode failures do happen. I'd be unhappy, but not devastated. The financial loss would be the biggest thing if all of the drives got toasted; i.e. drive replacement cost. The important data is backed up, and the rest can be replaced. Having said that, common mode failures are a pretty rare event these days, so I accept the risk (as I see it). -- Char Jackson |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Does a modern 7200rpm drive _NEED_ dedicated cooling? | [email protected] | Storage (alternative) | 4 | January 27th 05 02:07 PM |
What is the transfer rate of a modern hard drive? | Spacen Jasset | Homebuilt PC's | 1 | November 30th 04 06:49 PM |
Hard drive keeps being accessed?? | Evil Uncle Chris | Nvidia Videocards | 4 | September 16th 04 12:21 PM |
Modern mode to set up a new hard drive? | Albin | Storage (alternative) | 9 | February 5th 04 12:36 AM |