So we'll have full height drives and no full height bays?
Glad I still have my XT with the full height drive bay. Can't wait to hook 4TB to my 8088.
Hard disk drive suppliers are looking to add platters to increase capacity because of the expensive and difficult transition to next-generation recording technology. There are two candidates to replace the current Perpendicular Magnetic Recording (PMR) technology. The first is Heat-Assisted Magnetic Recording (HAMR) and the …
One has to plan ahead and find drive enclosures for these puppies!
The 12.5mm drives and some limited equipment is out there, it sounds like this will become the minimum form factor.
At a guess if you wanted a 2.5TB drive in the 2.5" form factor, that puppy is likely to be 25mm thick or 1 inch, with 8 platters.
It would be nice, no VERY nice to see SSDs getting more popular, with the emphasis on CHEAPER as they sell millions of them, but doesn't flash memory still suffer from a maximum number of writes being much lower than magnetic disks? I know there is technology that can optimise them by shuffling around the data that is written/changed most often so it gets moved to occupy different areas of the memory that weren't being used so much, but that can only help so much.
SSDs typically cost 15-20x the cost per Gb that HDD do. that's a lot of ground to make up. Plus SSD have a relatively short lifespan if used in an environment with a lot or read/write cycles, so they need to address that as well as cost before they are suitable for every situation.
It'll be a while yet before Terabytes of SSD will be price-competitive with magnetic storage, even if Moore's law stays on track for it to happen eventually. There are physical reasons to suspect it can't ever happen, but those only apply to extrapolation of current SSD technology, and I wouldn't be very surprised if someone didn't find a better way over the next decade or two.
By which time, magnetic storage will be up into the tens or hundreds of Tb, using the technologies described in the article, that are already working in the lab.
What will we be storing on it? There's always the mousetrap risk (build a better mousetrap, and the world does NOT beat a path to your door! )
Agreed. The biggest problem with SSDs now is that shrinking them with the current materials and process makes them less reliable. There are big problems with write endurance and unpowered data retention times that get worse each process shrink. I believe for SSD to catch magnetic disks for price and size there needs to be new materials used.
Height of drive isn't just the platters, there's got to be space between them for the heads.
Heads only need access to one side of the disk, so currently there's a load of space between the platters that nothing ever actually fills.
How about putting 2 stacks of 2.5" platters into a single 3.5" enclosure - then offset the platters so they interleave.
Idea not thought through at all. Think it'd fit. Overall platter size is ~ the same (OK, I'm assuming whole surface is writeable) - but you've now got something with 2 independent sets of heads and a lower edge speed. Could either treat it as two physical drives, or just bung a raid controller in.
When the platters gets bigger you get vibration problems.
3.5" is the practical limit with modern capacities, and they're struggling even then.
If you want good read/write speeds out of them they have to spin at ridiculous speeds...
(And the cost for 10 or 15K RPM disks is ridiculous... )
My first disk was a monster, the size of a washing machine with a 3-phase supply, ten fixed fourteen inch platters and one removable. The head stack was driven by a 1kW voice-coil motor, a 4 inch diameter coil on runners.
Capacity was a whopping 10.7 Megabytes.
Enough to store nearly all the information the state had on all its individuals.
Same here. I can't remember the model, but it was a Burroughs. Looked like the B90 shown here.
The requirement for the 3-phase supply was a combination of the size of the motor to turn the platters, and the pneumatic system to throw the heads away from the disk surface upon detection of the heads getting too close to the surface.
Those were the days.
It's all very well increasing density per drive, but if the spin speed stays the same then the overall performance per GB dramatically decreases. In the enterprise world there will be a lot of vendors selling more capacity than a customer needs in order to get the required IOps.
Of course, this all goes away once SSDs become bigger and cheaper ... but that's probably a few years away.
If every platter had twice as many heads, you could double the read/write speed.
Maybe it's time for heads mounted on fixed arms that bisect the platter, and just use linear motors to move them in/out across the platter surface.
You'd also halve access time, as nowhere on the platter would ever be more than half a rotation away from a head (instead of a whole rotation, as now).
Shingled recording being used in the marketplace currently? If you have some proof of this, Chris, then this should be the big story of the day. (Burying the lead. eh?) The impact of using Shingled recording on the user would be seen in performance tests and should not be sold without informing the user. If you have proof of Seagate or any other HDD mfgr currently producing a shingled HDD, please publish it. Stop writing about hearsay and opinion and do some old fashion reporting.
Clearly I'm technically-challenged, as I don't know what is meant by 'rebuild times' in the article:
>> one HDD manufacturer is telling Xyratex that 3.5-inch drives are dead, with 2.5-inch the future, due to rebuild times: "2TB drive rebuild times are heading towards a week."
Anyone care to explain? Pretty sure this isn't referring to rebuilding a RAID array (well, I hope not :/).
This refers to the time needed to rebuild data on a spare drive when a drive in a RAID array fails. I can imagine that the Xyratex CEO was quoting the longest time he could think of. A Pillar Data note -
- showed a NetApp array needing almost 30 hours to rebuild a 500GB drive with 2 logical volumes on it with the logical volumes being busy during that time. If we quadruple that time to envisage how long a 2TB drive would take, that gets us to 120 hours which is four days - not too far away from the Xyratex CEO"s comment.
I believe Amiga floppy drives used this trick to have an effective capacity of 880K on the same disks that PC drives were limited to 720K (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_disk#Commodore_Amiga).
"Because the entire track is written at once, inter-sector gaps could be eliminated, saving space."
We didn't know to call it shingled in those days though :)
Western Digital has confirmed the board is considering "strategic alternatives" for the storage supplier, including spinning out its flash and hard disk businesses.
This follows calls last month by activist investor Elliott Management, which has amassed a $1 billion investment in WD equating to a six percent share stake, for a "full separation" based on those product lines.
In a statement, CEO David Goeckeler said: "The board is aligned in the belief that maximizing value creation warrants a comprehensive assessment of strategic alternatives focused on structural options for the company's Flash and HDD businesses.
Updated Activist investor Elliott Management is pushing for Western Digital Corporation's board to break the business in two by splitting the hard disk drive and NAND flash divisions into separately traded entities.
In an open letter to the board [PDF], Elliott – which has over time invested roughly $1 billion in WDC, representing about a 6 percent stake – says it is almost six years since WD bought SanDisk for $19 billion, scooping up its NAND memory biz.
At the time, this purchase was "nothing less than transformative", the letter adds, propelling five-decade-old WDC beyond HDDs into one of the biggest players in flash. Synergies, a better strategic position, and enhanced financial profile were among the rationale for the deal, says Elliott.
Users of Western Digital's EdgeRover app for Windows and Mac are advised to download an updated version to avoid a security flaw that might allow an attacker unauthorized access to directories and files.
The flaw, which was given the CVE identification number CVE-2022-22988, carries a Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) severity rating of 9.1, making it a critical weakness. It has now been addressed, however, with a modification to the way EdgeRover handles file and directory permissions.
According to Western Digital, the flaw meant that EdgeRover was subject to a directory traversal vulnerability, which may have allowed an attacker to carry out a local privilege escalation and bypass file system sandboxing. If successfully exploited, this could lead to the disclosure of sensitive information or even a potential denial-of-service attack, the firm said.
At last week's Open Compute Project global summit, Seagate demonstrated a mechanical hard disk drive with an NVMe interface – an interface normally reserved for SSDs. The clue is right there in the name: NVM, Non-Volatile Memory. So the first question is... why?
The idea is that by having two (or more) separate arms scuttling independently to and fro across the media, hard disks can run fast enough that current SATA interfaces will prove to be a bottleneck. That's 6Gb/s for SATA revision 3, or 600MB/s in reality, while NVMe maxes out at 20Gb/s.
Western Digital has announced a "breakthrough in storage that works differently," in the form of a new architecture combining traditional platters with solid-state flash: OptiNAND.
Adding flash to traditional mechanical hard drives is not a new concept. Western Digital announced its first work on the concept back in 2011 after being beaten to market by rival Seagate's Momentus XT, a year prior. In both cases, the solid-state flash acted as a temporary buffer for the most commonly accessed data - attempting to blend the best of both storage worlds.
OptiNAND, though, is positioned differently. Rather than simply improving throughput and access time for the user's most commonly examined data, an OptiNAND-enabled drive is claimed to offer increased overall capacity, improved performance across the whole disk, and a fiftyfold increase in the amount of data retained if you accidentally pull the power in the middle of a write.
Western Digital says it will alert customers when it reformulates its products by modifying their firmware and electronics, as opposed to burying salient changes on a spec sheet without any public announcement.
This issue came up lately when the computer storage giant low-key altered the components in its WD Blue SN550 NVMe SSD. The product data sheet was quietly updated to reflect the change. Nonetheless, Chinese tech site Experview spotted the refresh when it compared an SN550 SSD made on July 28, 2021 with an earlier model and found the flash memory identifier and firmware number differed.
What made that a matter of concern was that the SN550 with the new components has a write speed of 390MB/s that's only about half the old configuration once the cache was used up. In effect, Western Digital silently downgraded the SN550, seemingly using slower NAND flash, presumably as a cost-saving measure.
The SweRVolf project, a fully open system-on-chip designed as a reference platform for Western Digital's RISC-V SweRV cores, has announced a major new release promising lower barriers to entry for those looking to experiment.
"Western Digital released the first of the SweRV cores, EH1, in 2018," Olof Kindgren, senior digital design engineer at Qamcom and director at the Free and Open Source Silicon (FOSSi) Foundation, told The Register.
"While it was an amazing core, and the fastest 32-bit RISC-V core at least at that time, they were new to the world of open-source silicon and asked me what they should do to make it easier for others to pick it up.
Western Digital has alerted customers to a critical bug on its My Book Live storage drives, warning them to disconnect the devices from the internet to protect the units from being remotely wiped.
In an advisory, the storage firm said My Book Live and My Book Live Duo devices were being "compromised through exploitation of a remote command execution vulnerability" CVE-2018-18472. The exploit is described as a root remote command execution bug which can be triggered by anyone who knows the IP address of the affected device – and is currently being "exploited in the wild in June 2021 for factory reset commands."
Updated US Commerce Committee Senator Roger Wicker is on a mission to find out if HDD makers stateside are shipping drives to Huawei, and has fired off questions to Seagate, Toshiba America Electronic Components (TAEC) and Western Digital.
This follows the initiation of a US Department of Commerce (DoC) investigation in March into the possible supply of Seagate HDDs to Huawei.
At the time we asked Seagate whether it was shipping disks to the much-maligned Chinese tech biz and it responded by saying it "complies with all applicable laws including export control regulations", and "We do not comment on specific customers."
For about three years, disk-making giant Seagate has been talking up tech called “MACH.2” – a conventional disk drive that offers considerable speed improvements. And now the disk giant has found that the tech also cuts its costs, raising the prospect that big, fast, hard disk drives might emerge at keen prices.
MACH.2 gets its speed by using two actuators – the twitchy little devices that move the arms carrying read/write heads to the parts of a disk’s platter that matter. While disks contain multiple platters and heads, they move all their arms at once and can only do one thing at a time with one arm. MACH.2 drives have two actuators, each driving arms and heads that address half of the platters in a disk and can do two things at once. They’re therefore pleasingly rapid.
MACH.2 also offer pleasingly large capacities up to 20TB. That combination of speed and capacity has seen Microsoft buy up plenty of the Seagate’s early production run and put them to work in the Project Olympus servers it deploys inside the Azure cloud
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022