[ale] Large Drives [Re: XFS on Linux - Is it ready for prime time?]

[Greg Freemyer]

fyi:

Fry's was selling Seagate 1.5TB drives for $89 over the weekend (limit
2). I don't know if that sale is still ongoing.  That's about $0.06 /
GB!!!

We actually just had a client call us and they want us to make a copy
of 1.8 TB of data to a sata drive so they can have a working copy
seperate from the official copy.  I didn't even that 2TB drives were
readily available.   $169 at Fry's I think, so 1.5TB's are your best
$/GB.

Someone said SSD's are dropping in price.  They're still $3 or $4 per
GB, right?  Compared to well less than $0.10 / GB for rotating.

AIUI, the real cost advantage for SSDs will be when they get a 32GB or
so sized drive less than $50.

At that point, it will make sense for a lot of corp. desktops to move
to SSD as a pure cost saving thing.

ie. Rotational will likely never drop below $50 regardless of the
capacity, but SSD has that possibility and a lot of corporate desktops
would work just fine with only 32GB or so.


Obviously, that will drive a huge amount of demand, so the fabs will
be capacity limited for many years once that magic transition takes
place.  So your likely kidding yourself if you think SSDs will drop
below $1.50/GB in the next few years.

Greg

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Greg Clifton <gccfof5 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Shift in focus to the hardware side of the equation. This thread
> concentrates on software generated corruption issues, but I have some
> hardware related questions. First, with RAIDed hard drives, are any file
> systems more or less likely to cause (or minimize) the likelihood of
> corruption of the array and if so, why? Second Greg F (and others) have
> commented on NOT using RAID 5 (and RAID 6) esp. with large hard drives.
> Looks like 1 or 2 TB hard drives will soon be "standard issue" for
> everything but notebook computers. So does that mean that RAID should be
> considered 'dead,' except for 0, 1, 10? Third, would SSDs solve the failure
> from bad sector issues with HDDs and thus be safe for RAID 5/6
> implementations?
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Ed Cashin <ecashin at noserose.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Doug McNash <dmcnash at charter.net> wrote:
>> ...
>> > Does anyone out there use xfs? How about a suggestion for a stable
>> > replacement.
>>
>> If you use the xfs in the mainline kernel, it's a crap shoot because
>> of the amount of churn in the code, but
>> if you use a long-term kernel like 2.6.16.y, 2.6.27.y, or the kernels
>> maintained by distros, then it ought to be stable (as long as the
>> distro has enough of a user base for other people to find the xfs
>> bugs first).
>>
>> --
>>  Ed Cashin <ecashin at noserose.net>
>>  http://noserose.net/e/
>>  http://www.coraid.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>



-- 
Greg Freemyer
Head of EDD Tape Extraction and Processing team
Litigation Triage Solutions Specialist
http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregfreemyer
CNN/TruTV Aired Forensic Imaging Demo -
   http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/23/how-computer-evidence-gets-retrieved/

The Norcross Group
The Intersection of Evidence & Technology
http://www.norcrossgroup.com