5 ms·
> It’s frankly obvious that the 1EB tape would have faster write speeds than that, and pretending otherwise doesn’t make a compelling discussion. OK, so I shou
by thomastjeffery 3y ago
> It’s frankly obvious that the 1EB tape would have faster write speeds than that, and pretending otherwise doesn’t make a compelling discussion.
OK, so I should assume the max of "GB/s speeds"? 999GB/sec would still take 11-12 days!
---
Even if we do limit to 1GB/sec, that's a lot of data to be logging, even if it's raw video. It would be neat to have that as a sort of infinite throwaway chache, though, but I can't imagine really using more than a petabyte or two.
- coder543 3y ago12 days would be adequate. This is archival storage, not high performance storage. However, I will emphasize again that CeraTape is further in the future, so it makes sense that Cerabyte would not be ready to discuss performance figures for that. What you’re continuously quoting is certainly referring to CeraMemory, the stuff they’re planning to release sooner in smaller capacities. 10PB at 10GB/s would be about 12 days. Even if it were 5GB/s, it would still be less than a month. A major trade off, to be sure, but I can definitely imagine applications where that would be acceptable if the cost were low and the durability were high. The real question is whether they can deliver what they’re promising at a reasonable price.