352
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] huquad@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 days ago

Parity rebuild will only take a week....

[-] CptEnder@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

A week before next month

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 31 points 2 days ago

Obligatory hint that SMR isn't suited for RAID systems.

[-] ninth_plane@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Tape on a platter, basically.

[-] Eximius@lemmy.world 20 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

A better way to word it is: SMR is only suited for archival usage. Large writes, little-to-no random writes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Wonder what happens if you throw them in an unraid BTRFS/jbod configuration with a CMR parity drive.

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago

Slowdown and data corruption?

[-] Toes@ani.social 10 points 2 days ago

My 6TB drive just died. So I'm in the market for a new one.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago

sorry but these aren't 6TB

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Mebbe the 26 one is just 3-4 smaller drives inside it?

[-] Anti_Face_Weapon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

You joke but that's sorta how it works for some HDDs lol

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I hope you think of having several platters, not real drives :-D

[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

this is great news! I'm running low on space on my 20tb now.

[-] kaitco@lemmy.world 89 points 3 days ago

My Jellyfin just quivered…

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 56 points 3 days ago

I’ve been looking to buy a couple 24TB drives. Hopefully, this pushes their price down.

[-] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 40 points 3 days ago

Peertube instance owners rejoice!

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago

Or just people who download porn.

[-] Ugurcan@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago

If you eyeballing these, please remind that these babies tend to be LOUD AS FUCK, so might not be suitable for home server use.

[-] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago

Just don't put it in your bedroom. All those dead skin cells wouldn't do good to it anyway.

[-] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 8 points 2 days ago

Since when is dust a concern for hard drives??

[-] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

I was talking about the server in general

[-] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

Drives like this are hermetically sealed with an inert gas like argon or helium on the inside. Even the presence of oxygen and nitrogen molecules can compromise the drive. If dust is getting to the moving parts of your hard drive, it's toast no matter where it's installed.

[-] Jarix@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Are they any louder than any HDD from the last 30 years?

If so, im actually curious why that is

Edit: fixed to say HDD not SSD

[-] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 1 day ago

My NAS uses a pair of SAS drives, and they make noises at boot up that would be concerning in a desktop. They're quite obnoxious. But I keep them in part of the house where they don't bother me.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Longpork3@lemmy.nz 34 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

When will it be commercially available though? Supposedly Seagate has had 30TB drives out for the better part of a year, but I can't find anything larger than 24TB actually available for purchase.

[-] dan@upvote.au 5 points 2 days ago

I'd guess that they're commercially available but only for hyperscalers - large companies like Google, Amazon (AWS), etc that need a huge amount of storage.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] addie@feddit.uk 26 points 3 days ago

Assuming that these have fairly impressive 100 MB/s sustained write speed, then it's going to take about 93 hours to write the whole contents of the disk - basically four days. That's a long time to replace a failed drive in a RAID array; you'd need to consider multiple disks of redundancy just in case another one fails while you're resilvering the first.

[-] DaPorkchop_@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

My 16TB ultrastars get upwards of 180MB/s sustained read and write, these will presumably be faster than that as the density is higher.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 1 day ago

I'm guessing that only works if the file is smaller than the RAM cache of the drives. Transfer a file that's bigger than that, and it will go fast at first, but then fill the cache and the rate starts to drop closer to 100 MB/s.

My data hoarder drives are a pair of WD ultrastar 18TB SAS drives on RAID1, and that's how they tend to behave.

[-] DaPorkchop_@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This is for very long sustained writes, like 40TiB at a time. I can't say I've ever noticed any slowdown, but I'll keep a closer eye on it next time I do another huge copy. I've also never seen any kind of noticeable slowdown on my 4 8TB SATA WD golds, although they only get to about 150MB/s each.

EDIT: The effect would be obvious pretty fast at even moderate write speeds, I've never seen a drive with more than a GB of cache. My 16TB drives have 256MB, and the 8TB drives only 64MB of cache.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
352 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

58792 readers
3332 users here now

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


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS