29 ms·
SSD's are not suitable for reliable long term cold storage due to their finite data retention. Newer chips with even more voltage levels per NAND cell for im
by RF_Savage 3y ago
SSD's are not suitable for reliable long term cold storage due to their finite data retention.
Newer chips with even more voltage levels per NAND cell for improved density are even worse.
Some of the data center grade SSD's have rated data retention of 3 months at 40°C if unpowered.
Having to keep the archival media powered to retain the data does not sound too attractive.
- nine_k 3y agoHow much power would it take? For what I could find, Samsung 970 EVO Plus (1 TB) consumes 40 mW when idle. This means that a 100 TB array would have to spend about 40W on idling, or 350.4 kWh a year. Even at $0.50 / kWh, it would cost $175, a trivial price to pay for having your data instantly available. The price per TB is not great though, about $50, while an 45TB LTO9 cartridge is about $110, or $2.44 pet TB. So it's not the price of the power.
- garblegarble 3y ago>while an 45TB LTO9 cartridge is about $110, or $2.44 pet TB 45TB is the 'compressed' capacity, the actual capacity is 18TB for LTO9, for $6.11/TB - still an order of magnitude cheaper than SSD, mind you!