3 ms·

Are these Blu-ray disks rewritable? If so, wouldn't this be a great tech for Amazon's Glacier service? I believe they currently depend of costly tape drives to

by nivla 13y ago

Are these Blu-ray disks rewritable? If so, wouldn't this be a great tech for Amazon's Glacier service? I believe they currently depend of costly tape drives to store data.

dsl 13y ago
Why bother with rewriteable disks? This is cold storage meaning that they will likely never throw this data away. I'd suspect Amazon's Glacier runs on something similar.
- nivla 13y ago
  >Why bother with rewriteable disks? Its okay for Facebook and other single entities for backups. However for Glacier, it would mean throwing away the disk whenever someone deletes their data. It would also means constant replacement of disks.
  - ceejayoz 13y ago
    > However for Glacier, it would mean throwing away the disk whenever someone deletes their data. Probably not a huge concern, given the use case. Glacier is pretty fire-and-forget. > It would also means constant replacement of disks. They're already doing that with servers, why would disks be a problem?
bluthru 13y ago
Do rewritable blurays last as long as write-once discs?
- Nagyman 13y ago
  In the video he said those discs last 50 years, but that you can get them up to 1000 years.
  - tim333 13y ago
    I wonder how they figure that. I wouldn't want to bet on them being ok in 3014.
    - millstone 13y ago
      They don't have to last 1000 years. They just have to outlast the receipt.
akg_67 13y ago
Each LTO-6 tape cartridge stores 6TB of data. Each quadruple layer Blue-ray disk stores only 128GB. I am surprised that FB went with Optical Disk instead of Tape. Optical jukeboxes/libraries for MO/DVD/CD used to be popular a decade or so ago and now considered antique. There is just not enough density with optical.
- mrtksn 13y ago
  how reliable are these tapes?
- sargun 13y ago
  My guess: 1) Lower cost for drives (commodity drives). 2) The ability to (easily) seek to an arbitrary location on disk 3) Cost of BD burners are <$100; Cost per GB of disks is $0.025/GB. LTO-6 drives are $1000+, and cost per GB is around $0.012/GB. -- I think the cost works out actually, especially as the cost of blu-ray is still falling.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
mcpherrinm 13y ago
I believe Glacier is an all-hard-drive solution. Tapes are troublesome because they're not "online" so it's harder to verify data integrity and notice failures. The drives are spun much slower than a regular drive (I've heard 300rpm) and so they can be crammed into much higher density racks without worrying about heat. Maybe data is eventually moved to tapes for Glacier; I am privy to no special information.

by nivla 13y ago

Are these Blu-ray disks rewritable? If so, wouldn't this be a great tech for Amazon's Glacier service? I believe they currently depend of costly tape drives to store data.

dsl 13y ago

Why bother with rewriteable disks? This is cold storage meaning that they will likely never throw this data away. I'd suspect Amazon's Glacier runs on something similar.

nivla 13y ago
>Why bother with rewriteable disks? Its okay for Facebook and other single entities for backups. However for Glacier, it would mean throwing away the disk whenever someone deletes their data. It would also means constant replacement of disks.
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  > However for Glacier, it would mean throwing away the disk whenever someone deletes their data. Probably not a huge concern, given the use case. Glacier is pretty fire-and-forget. > It would also means constant replacement of disks. They're already doing that with servers, why would disks be a problem?

bluthru 13y ago

Do rewritable blurays last as long as write-once discs?

Nagyman 13y ago
In the video he said those discs last 50 years, but that you can get them up to 1000 years.
- tim333 13y ago
  I wonder how they figure that. I wouldn't want to bet on them being ok in 3014.
  - millstone 13y ago
    They don't have to last 1000 years. They just have to outlast the receipt.

akg_67 13y ago

Each LTO-6 tape cartridge stores 6TB of data. Each quadruple layer Blue-ray disk stores only 128GB. I am surprised that FB went with Optical Disk instead of Tape. Optical jukeboxes/libraries for MO/DVD/CD used to be popular a decade or so ago and now considered antique. There is just not enough density with optical.

mrtksn 13y ago
how reliable are these tapes?
sargun 13y ago
My guess: 1) Lower cost for drives (commodity drives). 2) The ability to (easily) seek to an arbitrary location on disk 3) Cost of BD burners are <$100; Cost per GB of disks is $0.025/GB. LTO-6 drives are $1000+, and cost per GB is around $0.012/GB. -- I think the cost works out actually, especially as the cost of blu-ray is still falling.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

mcpherrinm 13y ago

I believe Glacier is an all-hard-drive solution. Tapes are troublesome because they're not "online" so it's harder to verify data integrity and notice failures. The drives are spun much slower than a regular drive (I've heard 300rpm) and so they can be crammed into much higher density racks without worrying about heat. Maybe data is eventually moved to tapes for Glacier; I am privy to no special information.