Looks like 30TB SSD drives exist in a 2.5" Form factor now.
https://www.newegg.com/samsung-pm1643-30-72tb/p/2U3-0005-000H7?item=9SIA994CAV5304
In theory price should continue to drop like they did with all previous
sizes. I'm not sure why SSD is fixated on the 2.5" size. I would think
that with the extra space of 3.5" they would easily scale higher.
I'm guessing that Spinning disks are on their way out?
Of course you could just go all in with the 100TB disk
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/gadgets-news/worlds-biggest-ssd-costs-40000/articleshow/76878101.cms
Just think, in 20 years we'll be talking about all that small scale
storage, back when a single disk was ONLY 100TB.
On 1/27/2021 11:42 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Recently, I read an article about spinning disks that should scale to
80 TB per 3.5" drive.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Bill Prince" <[email protected]>
*To: *[email protected]
*Sent: *Wednesday, January 27, 2021 11:32:15 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OT: Google storage math
I read an analysis recently (unfortunately I don't remember where it
was) discussing the optimum size for a storage device. It was making
the argument that the size itself becomes a problem when it exceeds
16TB or thereabouts. When it gets much larger, it interferes with just
getting data on/off because of transfer speeds and the shear amount of
data contained therein (or thereon?).
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 1/27/2021 9:26 AM, Mathew Howard wrote:
It doesn't take into account the capacity of new drives increasing
either though, so it could very well be close to linear, as far as
physical space goes.
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 11:11 AM Bill Prince <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
That does not take into account the rate of growth. It's
probably not linear, but I would not know if it is geometric
or what.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 1/27/2021 8:42 AM, Chuck McCown via AF wrote:
Off by a factor of 10. Each data center would be good for
140 years...
*From:* Chuck McCown via AF
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 27, 2021 9:12 AM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
*Cc:* Chuck McCown
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT: Google storage math
In one small corner of the larger data centers. Those
things are huge. 3000 square feed (including aisle space)
against 10 acre data centers. Each data center would be
good for 14 years and there are hundreds of data centers.
*From:* Bill Prince
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 27, 2021 6:43 AM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT: Google storage math
I look at it a different way. First, they are probably
using 16TB drives (although I don't know). Based on what
I've read, 16TB is the sweet spot for efficient large
storage. That said, a single rack a day seems like a big
deal to me. That's 365 racks per year. Yeesh. Talk about
real estate. They are probably having to get creative on
where to park all that stuff.
Oh yeah. Monetization too.
--
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 9:23 PM Robert
<[email protected]> wrote:
Only have to limit it to make you pay... Monitization.
One of the
first and richest of the non-founding googlers was the
director of
monitization...
On 1/26/21 7:12 PM, Nate Burke wrote:
> I got an email today reminding me about the changes
to Google Photos,
> and how they're going to be counting against your
Drive storage
> limit. The email said that "4.3 million GB of data
are uploaded to
> drive/photos/docs every day"
>
> 4,300,000 GB = 4199 TB = 4.1 PB
>
> So some quick back of the napkin math
>
> 4.1PB, Rumors are that Google creates 3 copies of
all data for
> redundancy. So every day they have to provide new
storage for ~12.3PB
> of storage
>
> Take an average size Hard drive of ~12TB That's 1050
hard Disks per day.
>
> For math's sake, a backblaze storage pod can hold 60
disks in 4U. So
> that's 18 Drive pods per day. So 72U of rackspace.
That's only a
> single rack per day, Not bad. Data centers are big.
>
> If they're getting the drives for $100 each, then
that's $105,000/day
> or $38.3M/year. So providing the storage for all of
Google
> photos/drive/docs is basically a rounding error to
Alphabet.
>
> Why are they having to limit my storage again?
>
> I'm really curious how much raw data is uploaded to
youtube every day,
> but I haven't seen any publicly available figures
recently (within the
> last several years).
>
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
