Comment on Western Digital details 14-platter 3.5-inch HAMR HDD designs with 140 TB and beyond

billwashere@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

• irmadlad@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  At some point a drive can get TOO big

  I was thinking the same. I would hate to toast a 140 TB drive. I think I’d just sit right down and cry. I’ll stick with my 10 TB drives.

  source

  • rtxn@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    This is not meant for human beings. A creature that needs over 140 TB of storage in a single device can definitely afford to run them mirrored with hot swaps.

    source

    • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      This is not meant for human beings.

      This is for like, Smaug but if he hoarded classic anime and the entirety of Steam or something. Lol

      source
    • thejml@sh.itjust.works ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Rebuild time is the big problem with this in a RAID Array. The interface is too slow and you risk losing more drives in the array before the rebuild completes.

      source

      • rtxn@lemmy.world ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Realistically, is that a factor for a Microsoft-sized company, though? I’d be shocked if they only had a single layer of redundancy. Whatever they store is probably replicated between hosts and datacenters several times, to the point where losing an entire RAID array (or whatever media redundancy scheme they use) is just a small inconvenience.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Yeah I’m running 16s and that’s pushing it imo

    source
• non_burglar@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  It doesn’t really matter, the current limitations are not so much data density at rest, but getting the data in and out at a useful speed. We breached the capacity barrier long ago with disk arrays.

  SATA will no longer be improved, we now need u.2 designs for data transport that are designed for storage. This exists, but needs to filter down through industrial application to get to us plebs.

  source

  • irmadlad@lemmy.world ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    640K ought to be enough for anybody.

    source
• pHr34kY@lemmy.world ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I don’t get how a single person would have that much data. I fit my whole life from the first shot I took on a digital camera in 2001… Onto a 4TB drive.

  …and even then, two thirds of it is just pirates movies.

  source

  • billwashere@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Amateur 😀

    But seriously I probably have close to 100 TB of music, TV shows, movies, books, audiobooks, pictures, 3d models, magazines, etc.

    source
  • panda_abyss@lemmy.ca ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I need a home for my orphaned podman containers /s

    I think this is better targeted to small and medium businesses. 

    if you run this as a NAS you could easily have all your budd s obsesses files in one place without needing complex networking. 

    source