3 ms·

The math on the first "dead" post only works out to 1PB per rack. Unless there is somehow a way to jam 90disks into 4U. The backblaze and supermicro 45 disk 4U

The math on the first "dead" post only works out to 1PB per rack. Unless there is somehow a way to jam 90disks into 4U. The backblaze and supermicro 45 disk 4U chassis suggest that would be pretty tough. Besides, there is still a good bit of rack left at 24U of JBOD plus 3 servers and TOR.

moe 12y ago
2PB per rack sounds about right for a very tightly packed rack. Most DC's can't supply power and cooling for that kind of density, though.
- pja 12y ago
  That density is doable if the drives spend most of their time powered down, which would fit with the potential Glacier restore delay while they wait for the discs you need to come round in the power cycle.
- mrb 12y ago
  The power requirements would be precisely why a Glacier HDD rack has only a fraction of its HDDs powered on at any given time. This also explains the 3-5 hours latency: you have a queue of jobs and you have to wait for other jobs to finish (eg. reading gigabytes of data) before your drive can be powered on. It all makes sense.
garblegarble 12y ago
The disk density, at least, isn't entirely out of line with what Amazon have publicly stated they have. Amazon have stated that their density is higher than Quanta products, and Quanta make a 60 disk 4U chassis, the M4600H: http://www.quantaqct.com/en/01_product/02_detail.php?mid=29&sid=143&id=144&qs=96 http://www.quantaqct.com/en/01_product/02_detail.php?mid=29&...
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
chx 12y ago
http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/847/SC847DE26-R2K02JBOD.cfm http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/847/SC847DE26-... 90 disks in 4U chassis. If you don't care about power / hot swap ( I doubt there's a datacentre monkey running around swapping disks for Glacier or actually anything -- Google anecdotally was repairing servers by removing two rackful worth of them at the same time ) then instead of piling them four deep you can pile them six deep (36" server depth / 6" disk depth) reaching 135 or so disks.
- hemancuso 12y ago
  This is awesome, wow. I wonder how you cool something like that without most of it being powered down.

moe 12y ago

2PB per rack sounds about right for a very tightly packed rack. Most DC's can't supply power and cooling for that kind of density, though.

pja 12y ago
That density is doable if the drives spend most of their time powered down, which would fit with the potential Glacier restore delay while they wait for the discs you need to come round in the power cycle.
mrb 12y ago
The power requirements would be precisely why a Glacier HDD rack has only a fraction of its HDDs powered on at any given time. This also explains the 3-5 hours latency: you have a queue of jobs and you have to wait for other jobs to finish (eg. reading gigabytes of data) before your drive can be powered on. It all makes sense.

garblegarble 12y ago

The disk density, at least, isn't entirely out of line with what Amazon have publicly stated they have. Amazon have stated that their density is higher than Quanta products, and Quanta make a 60 disk 4U chassis, the M4600H: http://www.quantaqct.com/en/01_product/02_detail.php?mid=29&sid=143&id=144&qs=96 http://www.quantaqct.com/en/01_product/02_detail.php?mid=29&...

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

chx 12y ago

http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/847/SC847DE26-R2K02JBOD.cfm http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/847/SC847DE26-... 90 disks in 4U chassis. If you don't care about power / hot swap ( I doubt there's a datacentre monkey running around swapping disks for Glacier or actually anything -- Google anecdotally was repairing servers by removing two rackful worth of them at the same time ) then instead of piling them four deep you can pile them six deep (36" server depth / 6" disk depth) reaching 135 or so disks.

hemancuso 12y ago
This is awesome, wow. I wonder how you cool something like that without most of it being powered down.