3 ms·
Which of these are read optimized drives? I know that the 100TB announcement this week (forgot the vendor) was optimized for writing once and mostly reading, ki
by cm3 10y ago
Which of these are read optimized drives? I know that the 100TB announcement this week (forgot the vendor) was optimized for writing once and mostly reading, kinda like for cold storage ala SMR.
- ChuckMcM 10y agoOr, for example, you're recording a lot of surveillance data and you never^h^h^h^h^hhardly ever modify it. Edit: simple math HD stream 10mbps (1MB/s) 24hrs = 86.4GB,that is nearly 2 years of uninterrupted coverage on 1 drive in HD.
- cm3 10y agoHehe, sure. with so many of new drives being optimized for write-once, read-often, it's important to know that from the announcements. Otherwise, people will get hopes high, thinking they can have 100TB random access flash drives in a year.
- tener 10y agoCorrect me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't tape drives be cheaper for surveillance?
- mc32 10y agoI guess that depends on the streams and ingestion rates.
- atYevP 10y agoAnd "degestion" rates - as tape would typically have longer "restore" times.
- ChuckMcM 10y agoYou are not wrong. But its useful to ask the question, "Why don't current surveillance camera set ups use tape? Its cheaper per gigabyte right?" When NetApp was successfully selling their Nearstore line (SATA drive based filers) and replacing StorageTek robot tape libraries in surveillance installs the winning factor was "time to time-code" or specifically when someone said "We'd like to see what happened on this day, at this time, on this camera, how long will that take?" And generally it was many many minutes, and while they were doing that nobody else was looking at any other times/cameras. With a lot of disks online, the footage could be called up quickly, and multiple analysts could be looking at different times/feeds at the same time. As a result it was the cost of Analyst time, not the cost of media, that dominated the "value" of the surveillance storage device.
- protomyth 10y agoEven small operations end up viewing the footage which requires a lot of back and forth search. This isn't really an easy thing on tape which has made the hard drive option the best. Plus, most of the newer cameras are HD and that upped the speed requirements for recording. Never mind how many cameras you end up getting just to provide coverage of buildings, particularly non-rectangle setups, and that's just the outside.
- georgyo 10y agoThey better be super reliable. The article states that they have 1GB/s write speeds. 100TB / 1GB/s = 27 hours to completely write the disk. That that's at MAX write speed, you could easily have a raid rebuild time of well over a week. A week were performance is suffering, and you are praying that more drives don't fail.
- rodgerd 10y agoMultiple replicas or parity stripes (z2, 3 way mirrors, etc) would be mandatory when you've got that much data in a single device, as a minimum.