7 ms·
Are there actual situations where you would even want this much data on a single drive?
by twerkmonsta 3y ago
Are there actual situations where you would even want this much data on a single drive?
- nmcela 3y agoI am 100.0% sure this is what someone has said for 256GB drives, 256MB drives, 256KB drives, and the same person will be saying it for 256YB drives.
- bguebert 3y ago"640K ought to be enough for anybody"
- amelius 3y agoWas this the same person who said that 640KB ought to be enough for anybody?
- flskafdslaf 3y agoThey are probably still right. How much of the computing resources we all now have access to do we actually need?
- bryanlarsen 3y agoMany novels are more than 640KB of ASCII text.
- TeMPOraL 3y agoThey are, but ought they?
- flskafdslaf 3y agoMakes you wonder how people read long novels before they had enough RAM!
- jaggederest 3y agoI clearly remember getting an 80gb drive, circa 2001-2002 I think, and talking with my friends about how impossible it would be to ever fill.
- lesuorac 3y agoThe problem is that the size of media has been growing exponentially. When I keep wondering how my phone is running out of space every time its images / videos. Even when you look at an app that is like 400 MB its not 400 MB of code, its like 350 MB of images and 50 MB of code.
- alphabetting 3y agoI laughed today when it was announced Buldar's Gate 3 is 120GB
- jeegsy 3y agoEven with all these advancements, 120GB for a game is still and always will be a lot!
- jasonjmcghee 3y agoHaving many very high resolution textures adds up. I’m sure we’ll see it rise, especially in the age of generated textures and materials.
- serf 3y ago>I’m sure we’ll see it rise, especially in the age of generated textures and materials. if generative AIs get good enough then I suppose at some point the data transmitted for games and media could be significantly less than now -- you'd 'just' need to transmit the data required for the prompt to generate something within some bounded tolerance. Imagine a game shipping no textures, generating what was needed on the fly and in real time to fulfill some shipped set of priorities/prompts/flavors. we're not there yet but it seems like on-the-fly squashing of concepts into 'AI language' is going to be a trend in lossy compression at some point.
- KnobbleMcKnees 3y ago>256YB drives Ah yes, Yagnibytes.
- all2 3y agoY'otta look that one up.
- rbanffy 3y agoWhile I agree, it's been hard filling up the 2TB drive in my laptop. My home server has a couple dozen terabytes (on spinning metal) and, with current fill rate, it's predicted it'll need an increase in space only after two of the drives reach retirement according to SMART. It hosts multiple development VMs and stores backups for all computers in the house. Another aspect is that the total write lifetime is a multiple of the drive capacity. You can treat a 256TB drive as a very durable 16TB drive, able to last 16 times more writes than the 16TB one.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago>While I agree, it's been hard filling up the 2TB drive in my laptop. Then you're defiantly not torrenting enough "definitely legit" content as I am. Once you sail the dark seas it piles up quick. Or maybe I have ADHD.
- alternatetwo 3y agoOr just download a few modern games. No torrents here, absolutely none.
- FractalParadigm 3y agoI think, for me, it satisfies some kind of hoarding instinct. I have a hard time keeping 'random junk' laying around my apartment, but I have absolutely no problem keeping a copy of a DVD I ripped 15 years ago that I will probably never watch again, and would probably be upset if it disappeared for some reason.
- TeMPOraL 3y agoDon't even have to set your sail; this landlubber likes likes to shoot videos with a smartphone, and these days, recording a few minutes of a family event, or even your plane taking off, in decent quality, will easily give you a multi-gigabyte video file. And that's for normal videos; $deity help you if you enable HDR. And yes, this is the universal answer to "how much storage is enough" - use cases will grow to consume generally-available computing resources. Today it's 4k UHD + HDR; tomorrow it'll be 8k UHD + HDR, few years later it will be 120 FPS lightfield recording with separate high-resolution radar depth map channel. And as long as progress in display tech keeps pace, the benefits will be apparent, and adoption will be swift.
- dabluecaboose 3y agoI vividly remember seeing a 5TB drive at Fry's Electronics sometime around 2010-2013 and thinking to my self "Who in gods name would ever need that much space" I now have 24 terabytes in my NAS
- twerkmonsta 3y agoBut practically don’t you reach a threshold where storing that much data on one drive makes it a bottleneck and safety risk until the speed of the surrounding systems catch up?
- onychomys 3y agoI do digital histology, and our (research) lab currently has 204TB of image files. They live in a data center, of course, but if my institution decided to spin us off as a company or something and we needed to move the data, it'd be way faster to download it to disk and upload it in the destination center. I'm not really sure we'd do it with just one giant drive instead of a whole lot of 1TB ones, but who knows. (I'm currently working on sending 100TB of images to some colleagues at the NIH for a study, we're doing it about 500GB a night for the next year or however long it'll take just because there's no hurry on the data, so it's not just some academic thought exercise!)
- fortysixdegrees 3y agoThat's just 5 20tb drives. Some cloud providers will copy it on to them if you send them in, and usually cheaper than the bandwidth cost. Same for ingress
- yread 3y agoExactly, we just gobble up all the storage there is. In diagnostics it's easily 250GB per patient just for HEs. And if stuff like CODEX or light-sheet (or some other 3D) microscopy become common place even these drives won't be enough.
- Vt71fcAqt7 3y agoThis is why: >Compared to stacking eight 32TB SSDs, one 256TB SSD consumes approximately seven times less power, despite storing the same amount of data. This is aimed for servers, where the electricity costs are higher because they are running 24/7 and space is limited. Also less power means less heat.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- justsomehnguy 3y agoCompact and shock-proof storage for video data? Sure. Other cases? It can be a 1T in some use-cases, but DPWD is probably low.
- parl_match 3y agoYeah, when you're trying to pack as much storage into a small space, such as data centers with expensive real estate. Or where distance is constrained due to latency, such as high end machine learning workloads.
- _jplc 3y agoI think any data center would want some of these as long as the speeds are enough to reconstruct a disk after a failure in a reasonable time in a RAID configuration. Data density is a hell of a drug.
- dmonitor 3y agosomeday those 60GB bluray rips I see on trackers might be viable for a local media server.
- yieldcrv 3y agoits wild because the 4gb h265 ones are great I have 4k screens and an okay sound system, who are these whatever-philes that think these 60gb rips change the experience meaningfully like, how many audio tracks you need and the other 50gb so you can stare at black pixels and say “wow these blacks are so impressive”
- TeMPOraL 3y agoMy guess: this probably solves the issue with compression artifacts creating annoying blocks of color in dark/black areas of the video, which is increasingly important as the past decade had movie and TV show makers all switch to shooting everything ridiculously dark.
- faeriechangling 3y agoI can absolutely tell the difference and it’s frankly annoying to collect something which will become obsolete not just within your lifespan but when you’ll likely have a lot of lifespan left to go. 4K blurays to me hold up compared to 5k/6k/8k raw footage to the point I wouldn’t be too troubled if I had an old format on my NAS when an h.267 8k version came out. You can have a great experience by streaming videos directly off shady streaming sites and using a cheap Hisense TV but there will always be a market for people dropping tens to hundreds of grand on some elite home theatre with inky blacks and perfect sound and maybe a datacenter storage array in their garage. It’s practically a hobby.
- yieldcrv 3y agoyou know, I’ve never actually bought a bluray video before, maybe I’ll pop one in my ps5 and see if I’m blown away, or more likely if the other sources start having things I cant unsee I did recently get back into piracy, and did a couple comparisons since I figured 4gb h265 is so last decade, and I really wasnt amused by the larger bluray rips. I have 20/10 vision acuity and can also see a broad vivid colorspace. I have great monitors and screens chosen for that color space and quality too.
- chrisco255 3y agonpm install **/*
- TeMPOraL 3y agoIt's likely that `size("npm install */*")` grows faster than drive capacities.
- jimt1234 3y agoI bought my first HDD in the mid-90s: 850MB. There was a 1.2GB model, but I thought, "Why would I ever need that much space?" This was before videos, before mp3s, and images were all low quality jpegs.
- Iulioh 3y ago3d scans are the future Imagine how much data could you generate daily! Thos aside, a FHD movie in good quality still takes 10-30gb We are still limited by size and internet speed and need to compress data
- bradknowles 3y agoBack in the summer of 1989, I did an internship at Imprimis (later bought by Seagate). The big thing they launched that summer was the Wren VII hard drive, which was the first consumer hard drive with 1GB of storage. It was massive! I learned a lot about Statistical Quality Control that summer, and built them some tools for improving their SQC across all their models.
- riku_iki 3y agosome kind of scaled up database server. they build now with many smaller SSD attached, and maybe with this large one all maintenance process will be encapsulated in one component, so you can think about it as NAS but placed directly inside the server.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- klysm 3y agoAre you referring to the relationship of network to fill it?
- janemydarling 3y agoOLAP/data analysis. If I have a century’s worth of point-in-time data, and I want to quickly run various tests against it: data marshaling will kill my soul if I’m using an HDD or various incarnations of hot-cold disk schemes. Granted, I’ll have to read it in 1TB “pages” since motherboard and RAM engineering haven’t gotten us very far.
- jrockway 3y agoA drive these days is a CPU, memory, and some flash chips. If the CPU and memory are swappable (isn't in consumer SSDs, no idea about enterprise), then one drive today is really many independent pieces of storage media. Thus, you'd imagine the failure case to be more like the failure case for one entire storage server (pipe drips on it, tornado sucks it up) rather than worrying about the failure case for mechanically-linked hermetically-sealed platters spinning at high speed. There is always the chance that all the flash chips fail at the same time because of a manufacturing defect. That has always been the gamble over multiple drives as well; many documented cases of all the drives in a RAID array failing at the same time. (This happened to me once! Terrible shipping from NewEgg damaged all 3 drives in my 3x RAID-1 array. I manually repaired them by RMA-ing the disks one at a time; fortunately different blocks failed on different drives and with 3 drives you could do a "best of 2".) No matter how many independent drives you have, you will always need your data stored in multiple data centers to survive natural disasters. So I don't see 256TB in one device any differently than putting 32 8TB SSDs in one server. If you need that much storage, you spend less of your day plugging it into your computer. Savings!
- jandrewrogers 3y agoYes, there are big data applications where direct-attached storage density has a large impact on the economics of working with and analyzing that data. This is mostly due to bandwidth constraints and the fact that many analytical workloads can run efficiently with limited compute/memory relative to storage. Using a vast number of servers when they are not actually required introduces its own challenges. Sensing and telemetry data models sometimes have this property.
- faeriechangling 3y agoDatacenters where you are paying a huge premium on every square inch of physical space used. Also currently every other common way to store this much data eats a lot more power and generates more heat.
- dharmab 3y agoYes, there are scientific computing problems that are significantly easier if you can store the entire dataset together.