168 points

Person with vested interest in X says X will continue to proliferate. More at 11

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Stupid elon

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Could have said more at 10 (X) 😁

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

on X (the artist formerly known as Twitter)

permalink
report
parent
reply
102 points
*

Haven’t hard drives been cheaper per storage amount than SSDs forever? The problem was always that they were slow. I think tape may still be cheaper per storage amount than hard drives, but the speed is abysmal.

Edit: yeah looks like tape is 3x to 4x cheaper than hard drives https://corodata.com/tape-backups-still-used-today

permalink
report
reply
57 points

Tape will be around until something better for archival purposes comes around

It lasts significantly longer sitting on the shelf than HDD or SSD by far

I doubt it’s being used for anything other than backups and archiving though

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

It’s also used for sending huge amounts of data long distances. “Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.” That’s usually attributed to Andrew S. Tanenbaum, but wikipedia follows that with “other alleged speakers include…” so take that with a grain of salt. They do note that the first problem in his book on computer networks asks students to calculate the throughput of a Saint Bernard carrying floppy disks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Do we assume the Saint Bernard is spherical and ignores air resistance?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Amazon is using trucks to ship hard drives for the largest data transfers. It’s more efficient than doing it over internet. They also offer a service where they will put the data you want in a drive, mail it to you, and after you’re done, you send the drive back.

https://aws.amazon.com/snowball/

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’d love to see what could be done with current tape storage technology in standard compact cassette format.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

There’s some space occupied by the servo tracks (which align the heads to the tap) in LTO, but if we ignore that…

Current-generation LTO9 has 1035m of 12.65mm wide tape, for 18TB of storage. That’s approximately 13.1m², or just under 1.4TB/m².

A 90 minute audio cassette has around 90m of 6.4mm wide tape, or 0.576m². At the same density it could potentially hold 825GB.

DDS (which was data tape in a similar form factor) achieved 160GB in 2009, although there’s a lot more tape in one of those cartridges (153m).

Honestly, you’d be better off using the LTO. Because they’re single-reel cartridges (the 2nd is inside the drive), they can pack a lot more tape into the same volume.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Yes. SSDs are still excellent for small form factor and speed, but for long term reliable storage in massive volumes, old fasion hard drives are only second to tape storage.

Source: I am in charge of four 1.2PB storage clusters, each consisting of 144 10TB Toshiba drives. The systems write their output to 10TB tapes for data delivery.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

It’s criminal that some computers are still sold with mechanical hard drives, but I will still be using them in NAS for years to come. The right technology for the right job.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I only use them in my NAS because I keep ending up with spare ones.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

That’s where I have a theory about when the hard drive market will collapse. A lot of networked drive setups have 4 drives on RAID 10. With SSDs, those can become 2 drive RAID1, and will be faster. That means SSDs can be 2x the cost to eliminate hard drives as a viable option for a very common use case.

That isn’t too far away. Your next NAS upgrade cycle might be with SSDs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I don’t see it in the next upgrade cycle (2 - 5 years). My data needs on a NAS are creeping into 50TB and 100TB at several different installations and unfortunately growing. Gigabit ethernet is my bottleneck not disk i/o.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Tapes themselves are cheaper but there’s also the upfront cost of the tape drive (we’re talking thousands).

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

And that there is the real crime. It’s a real shame no one’s making a tape drive at the consumer market price point. Tapes are a hell of a lot more convenient for backups and archival than the giant weird pile of storage formats we’ve seen over years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The average consumer can make do with Blu Ray.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Agreed and was looking for this comment.

The medium is cheap but the device to read/write is pricy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Wendel from level 1 techs really likes the multi actuator spinning rust drives. You still wouldn’t use them for a boot drive, but they’re fast enough to saturate a sata connection, while still being much more dense than ssds. They can achieve 500MB/s sequential speeds, so they’re plenty fast for large file access. Most consumers should be using SSD’s but if you’re dealing with more than a couple terabytes, the best solution isn’t as straightforward.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

There’s not much price difference between SSDs and hard drives that are 1 TB or less. Larger than that, hard drives are still much cheaper.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Slow is relative.

Are you trying to compile 1GB worth of code or load into memory 4GB of game at startup: absolutelly, they’re slow.

Are you serving a compressed 1080p video file from your NAS to your media player over 100Mb/s ethernet: they’re more than fast enough. (Or to put things another way, trying to fit your home collection of media files on SSDs in yout NAS is probably not so smart as you can get almost 10x the storage for the same price and the bottleneck in that system isn’t the HDD)

You’re not going to put a massive production database of a performance criticial system on an HDD but storing “just in case” in one your historic of RAW images files after you’ve processed them is probably the smart thing to do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

For me, reliability is now the bottleneck.

So many HDs are crapping out after about 5 years. Not saying SSDs are better, but I haven’t used any for storage. But it’s starting to feel like a subscription plan as I’m rotating hard drives in my server nearly every year now since 2018.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That seems high. Data center drives have a failure rate around 1% per year, even for the worst manufacturer. Not sure how many drives you have or what your workload is like.

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
4 points
*

As a newb I hope one day in my journey, I can look back at this and say “I finally understand this.” Til then thank you, magic man

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Don’t let your dreams be dreams, I didn’t know Jack shit about nas and just built my own with an old pc, I tried truenas but ended up paying for unraid, it was just easier for my needs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

This is my thing. I have about 122TB of spinning metal (with the same as an offsite backup) with SSDs as ZIL and L2ARC. And it’s awesome. HDDs I think will genuinely be important for for the foreseeable future.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Power consumption, noise, durability…

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

There is a lot of power to waste for the savings you made, when not buying expensive SSDs (20€ a year is not much). Where we use HDDs, we don’t care about noise. Durability? We use huge RAID systems with lots of redundancy.

I personally like to swap new drives after 5 years to avoid failures. So when you find a 16 TB SSD for 350€, you send me a message.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

My 4 bay HDD NAS uses around 45W, 50W with some light load, 70W spinning up. That’s about 1kWh per day, or 150 EUR per year.

I use it in my room, so I very much care about noise.

More durability = less redundancy (less cost) + less frequent swaps (less cost). My anecdotal evidence is 1 failed SSD in 15 years (160GB Intel, basically first Gen). Every other SSD is still working. I have a drawer full of failed HDDs.

Plus more performance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Toshiba’s estimates feel reasonable. While the price difference is slowly narrowing compared to the widening performance and form factor gap, it’ll certainly continue to be a slow death. The current price ratio would need to be inverted before it makes sense to drop hdds entirely. And even then tapes will still be around forever.

With investments in storage tech being so diverted away from HDD technologies I wonder how much further capacity will get. We’re already at the point where disks have many platters and HAMR is finally going to be delivered after decades of “coming soon”. It feels like, much akin to processor fab, we’re approaching a wall.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

Use HDDs for linear read/write (files) and SSDs for IOPS (databases)

permalink
report
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 505K

    Comments