What's new

The next data center dinosaur: Traditional storage

I realized, after speaking with SanDisk, that traditional storage is all but dead technology. What's going to replace it will surprise you.

Sure, I get it, things change slowly in data centers, but there's a rapid change that's sweeping through data centers all over the world: The switch to solid state storage.

Notice that I didn't write, solid state drives, but I did write storage instead. There's a difference and what's about to happen will surprise just about everyone except storage professionals. (Hint: Your spinning disks and disk-like SSDs are going to be extinct soon, so don't be too sentimental or wax nostalgic over them.)

I think just everyone realizes that the move to SSDs is already underway in the data center. Traditional storage is replacing tape. SSDs are replacing traditional disks. And solid state storage will replace SSDs.

OK, I know a lot of you just decided that I'm full of radio tubes, but I'm not. Just as transistors (a solid state technology) replaced vacuum tubes, solid state storage will not only replace traditional storage (arrays of spinning disks), but it will also replace now traditional SSDs.

Let me explain...

Read more at: The next data center dinosaur: Traditional storage | ZDNet
 

lehnerus2000

Power User
VIP Member
Power User
IMO, the problem with storage is transfer times.

It takes hours to write a couple of TB to most HDDs.
Even writing a couple of TB to an SSD (at 500 MB/s) takes too long.
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 (64 bit), Linux Mint 18.3 MATE (64 bit)
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    System Manufacturer/Model
    n/a
    CPU
    AMD Phenom II x6 1055T, 2.8 GHz
    Motherboard
    ASRock 880GMH-LE/USB3
    Memory
    8GB DDR3 1333 G-Skill Ares F3-1333C9D-8GAO (4GB x 2)
    Graphics Card(s)
    ATI Radeon HD6450
    Sound Card
    Realtek?
    Monitor(s) Displays
    Samsung S23B350
    Screen Resolution
    1920x1080
    Hard Drives
    Western Digital 1.5 TB (SATA), Western Digital 2 TB (SATA), Western Digital 3 TB (SATA)
    Case
    Tower
    Mouse
    Wired Optical
    Other Info
    Linux Mint 16 MATE (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 17 MATE (64 bit) - 2014-05-17
    Linux Mint 14 MATE (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 16 MATE (64 bit) - 2013-11-13
    Ubuntu 10.04 (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 14 MATE (64 bit) - 2013-01-14
    RAM & Graphics Card Upgraded - 2013-01-13
    Monitor Upgraded - 2012-04-20
    System Upgraded - 2011-05-21, 2010-07-14
    HDD Upgraded - 2010-08-11, 2011-08-24,

Brink

Administrator
Administrator
mvp
I await crystal storage with fiber optic data transfer. :party:

[video=youtube;r0f_rplpouE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0f_rplpouE[/video]
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    64-bit Windows 10
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    System Manufacturer/Model
    Custom self built
    CPU
    Intel i7-8700K OC'd to 5 GHz
    Motherboard
    ASUS ROG Maximus XI Formula Z390
    Memory
    16 GB (8GBx2) G.SKILL TridentZ DDR4 3200 MHz
    Graphics Card(s)
    ASUS ROG-STRIX-GTX1080TI-O11G-GAMING
    Sound Card
    Integrated Digital Audio (S/PDIF)
    Monitor(s) Displays
    2 x Samsung Odyssey G7 27"
    Screen Resolution
    2560x1440
    Hard Drives
    1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus M.2,
    250GB Samsung 960 EVO M.2,
    6TB WD Black WD6001FZWX
    8TB WD MyCloudEX2Ultra NAS
    PSU
    OCZ Series Gold OCZZ1000M 1000W
    Case
    Thermaltake Core P3
    Cooling
    Corsair Hydro H115i
    Keyboard
    Logitech wireless K800
    Mouse
    Logitech MX Master 3
    Internet Speed
    1 Gb/s Download and 35 Mb/s Upload
    Browser
    Internet Explorer 11
    Antivirus
    Malwarebyte Anti-Malware Premium
    Other Info
    Logitech Z625 speaker system,
    Logitech BRIO 4K Pro webcam,
    HP Color LaserJet Pro MFP M477fdn,
    Linksys EA9500 router,
    Arris SB8200 cable modem,
    APC SMART-UPS RT 1000 XL - SURT1000XLI,
    Lumia 1520 phone

Tepid

Vapor
Power User
I would have to search for it, but they had saved the entire library of congress to a crystal about 10 years ago.
So, the idea is an old one,, but the advancement you showed is new.

I agree, this tech would be cool to have right now.
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Win 8.1 Pro
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    System Manufacturer/Model
    Self Built
    CPU
    I7-3770K
    Motherboard
    ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77
    Memory
    CORSAIR 8GB 2X4 D3 1866
    Graphics Card(s)
    EVGA GTX680 4GB
    Monitor(s) Displays
    ASUS 24" LED VG248QE
    Hard Drives
    SAMSUNG E 256GB SSD 840 PRO -
    SAMSUNG E 120GB SSD840 -
    SEAGATE 1TB PIPELINE
    PSU
    CORSAIR GS800
    Case
    CORSAIR 600T
    Cooling
    CORSAIR HYDRO H100I LIQUID COOLER
    Keyboard
    THERMALTA CHALLENGER ULT GAME-KYBRD
    Mouse
    RAZER DEATHADDER GAME MS BLK-ED
    Antivirus
    Windows Defender
    Other Info
    APC 1000VA -
    LGELECOEM LG 14X SATA BD BURNER -
    CORSAIR SP120 Fans x 3 -
    NZXT 5.25 USB3 BAY CARD READER -
    HAUPPAUGE COLOSSUS

mikeytg

New Member
Pro User
IMO, the problem with storage is transfer times.

It takes hours to write a couple of TB to most HDDs.
Even writing a couple of TB to an SSD (at 500 MB/s) takes too long.

They are slow because they both conform to the old hard disk access model - basically a serial device that delivers streams of bits that are addressed in a block and sector fashion. Hard Drives do this because that is their nature; SSD's do this for backward compatibility.

What is needed is an overhaul of the system model where RAM is for immediate execution and disk is for long term storage. We need to somehow merge these two into one. Perhaps ALL storage will be executable and the desired data and code will be instantly mapped into the processor's address space for execution. When data is generated or changed there is no need to then store it to "disk" for long term storage but instead you can just leave it where it is. All storage will be both executable and permanent. Or something.

Hey, whatever happened to magnetic bubble memory?
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Windows 8.1 consumer 64 bit
    Computer type
    Laptop
    System Manufacturer/Model
    Acer Aspire M5 481PT-6644
    CPU
    Intel Core I5
    Memory
    6 GB
    Hard Drives
    Spinning/SSD hybrid 500GB/20GB
    Mouse
    ELAN Trackpad
    Internet Speed
    18mbs/5mbs
    Browser
    Chrome
    Antivirus
    Windows Defender

lehnerus2000

Power User
VIP Member
Power User
Hey, whatever happened to magnetic bubble memory?
That is a good question. :think:

I also remember some discussion of nano-ferrite core memory.
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 (64 bit), Linux Mint 18.3 MATE (64 bit)
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    System Manufacturer/Model
    n/a
    CPU
    AMD Phenom II x6 1055T, 2.8 GHz
    Motherboard
    ASRock 880GMH-LE/USB3
    Memory
    8GB DDR3 1333 G-Skill Ares F3-1333C9D-8GAO (4GB x 2)
    Graphics Card(s)
    ATI Radeon HD6450
    Sound Card
    Realtek?
    Monitor(s) Displays
    Samsung S23B350
    Screen Resolution
    1920x1080
    Hard Drives
    Western Digital 1.5 TB (SATA), Western Digital 2 TB (SATA), Western Digital 3 TB (SATA)
    Case
    Tower
    Mouse
    Wired Optical
    Other Info
    Linux Mint 16 MATE (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 17 MATE (64 bit) - 2014-05-17
    Linux Mint 14 MATE (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 16 MATE (64 bit) - 2013-11-13
    Ubuntu 10.04 (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 14 MATE (64 bit) - 2013-01-14
    RAM & Graphics Card Upgraded - 2013-01-13
    Monitor Upgraded - 2012-04-20
    System Upgraded - 2011-05-21, 2010-07-14
    HDD Upgraded - 2010-08-11, 2011-08-24,

Looey

New Member
I worked with IBM mainframes in the 1990's to 2000's that had some solid state storage connected for high I/O online applications in four JES2 complexes with four of IBM's largest mainframes in every complex. SSD was OK but it didn't solve the costs associated with the huge amounts of data created daily. We also had 350 servers of every kind from IBM, NCR, Sun and HP. People have budgets and some divisions can't pay for solid state storage. Many are happy with tape as a medium when running batch jobs like billing. We had so many tapes that we installed silos with robots inside to mount tapes. The daily trip to underground storage with backups took a nice sized truck. Eventually we installed a fiber optic connection to the east coast and backed up some critical data there. I think the federal government might be able to make the switch to SSD before most businesses outside of Google and Microsoft. The feds don't worry about costs because they don't have to make profits to stay in business. Witness the $17.6 trillion federal debt :).
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Windows 8.1.1
    System Manufacturer/Model
    Self made Intel
    CPU
    I7 4770K
    Motherboard
    Z87-A
    Memory
    8 GB
    Graphics Card(s)
    Nvidia GTX 650 Ti

jimbo45

New Member
VIP Member
Guru
IMO, the problem with storage is transfer times.

It takes hours to write a couple of TB to most HDDs.
Even writing a couple of TB to an SSD (at 500 MB/s) takes too long.

A typical HDD to HDD transfer on an average machine won't do anything like the rated SATA speed of 3 - 6 GB/s -- more like on average 100 mb/s.

So to transfer 1 TB of data = (1000 X 1000 ) / 100 secs where unit is in mbs so actually it should only take around 2.7 - 3 hrs !!! - f. For 2 TB that would be around 6 Hrs,

Even if the speed was 50 mb/s which is not unreasonable even for external USB then it STILL shouldn't take more than 12 hrs -- ok slow but internal HDD's would have to be really bad to only transfer at 50 mb/s.

(OK long enough but not desperate -- also how many times as a home user are you really suffling around 2 TB of data regularly. I've done it about TWICE when I was moving and re0aranging Music and video libraries).

I agree though if storage could be improved to approximate RAM then that would be fantastic. The internal BUS speeds of the MOBO's would need re-designing though.

@lehnerus -- @ 500mb/s an SSD would take 1 SEC to transfer 1 GB so 1000 secs to transfer 1TB = = approx 17 mins !!! so around 30 mins for the 2 TB data transfer. I could live with that.

What we really need is for the BUS speed to work faster even with current HDD's -- a horrible slow SATA laptop 2.5 inch drive can have a theoretical maximum speed of 3 GB/s -- exceeding by far your desired SSD speed of 500GB sec. There's no point in spending a fortune on getting HDD's or whatever to have data transfer rates of several GB/sec if the hardware they are used on can still only deliver 50 mb/s. !!!!

Cheers
jimbo
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Linux Centos 7, W8.1, W7, W2K3 Server W10
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    Monitor(s) Displays
    1 X LG 40 inch TV
    Hard Drives
    SSD's * 3 (Samsung 840 series) 250 GB
    2 X 3 TB sata
    5 X 1 TB sata
    Internet Speed
    0.12 GB/s (120Mb/s)

lehnerus2000

Power User
VIP Member
Power User
IMO, the problem with storage is transfer times.

It takes hours to write a couple of TB to most HDDs.
Even writing a couple of TB to an SSD (at 500 MB/s) takes too long.

A typical HDD to HDD transfer on an average machine won't do anything like the rated SATA speed of 3 - 6 GB/s -- more like on average 100 mb/s.

So to transfer 1 TB of data = (1000 X 1000 ) / 100 secs where unit is in mbs so actually it should only take around 2.7 - 3 hrs !!! - f. For 2 TB that would be around 6 Hrs,

Even if the speed was 50 mb/s which is not unreasonable even for external USB then it STILL shouldn't take more than 12 hrs -- ok slow but internal HDD's would have to be really bad to only transfer at 50 mb/s.

(OK long enough but not desperate -- also how many times as a home user are you really suffling around 2 TB of data regularly. I've done it about TWICE when I was moving and re0aranging Music and video libraries).
You are randomly swapping between bit (b) and bytes (B). :)

Every time I get a new (bigger) HDD I reorganise my storage setup to take advantage of the new capacity.
Also, once I have racked up a stack of edited videos I back them up to my external HDD.
Granted this isn't something I do on a daily basis.

Recently one of my internal 2 TB HDDs started playing up (lost a bunch of sectors).
I had to backup the surviving data to an external HDD.
Luckily I was able to let it run overnight.

My internal HDDs average ~50 MB/s.
Sometimes they will sustain more than 100 MB/s for several minutes.
Regularly the speed will drop to 30 MB/s or less.

@lehnerus -- @ 500mb/s an SSD would take 1 SEC to transfer 1 GB so 1000 secs to transfer 1TB = = approx 17 mins !!! so around 30 mins for the 2 TB data transfer. I could live with that.
That should be 2 seconds (500 MB x 2 seconds = 1000 MB). :)
Therefore ~34 minutes for 1 TB.

I don't like to perform multiple HDD transfer operations simultaneously.
Also, various Windows services love to "strobe" my HDD too (e.g. DWM)
You never know when one of these operations will interfere with another.

As an example, TCP is supposed to detect corrupted data blocks and request new ones as necessary.
However I have had corrupted downloads.
I see threads (on SevenForums and EightForums) where the poster is having download corruption problems (or the solution has been to re-download the file).
This means that the error checking/correction routines aren't 100% effective.

Therefore, I don't trust HDD transfer error checking/correction either.

What we really need is for the BUS speed to work faster even with current HDD's -- a horrible slow SATA laptop 2.5 inch drive can have a theoretical maximum speed of 3 GB/s -- exceeding by far your desired SSD speed of 500GB sec. There's no point in spending a fortune on getting HDD's or whatever to have data transfer rates of several GB/sec if the hardware they are used on can still only deliver 50 mb/s. !!!!
I'd love to be able to transfer at 500 GB/s. :)

If HDDs could run at 6 Gb/s (750 MB/s) instead of 800 Mb/s (100 MB/s) transfers of large files would be much faster.
Obviously if I had the time, money and inclination, I could create a RAID5 setup, which should increase my transfer speeds.

I have an SSD in my laptop (SanDisk Extreme II) which is supposed to have a spectacular transfer speed.
It probably boots up in half the time it takes my desktop (AV scans are quick).

Apart from those items, I can't say that it is impressive as it should be based on the specs. :confused:
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 (64 bit), Linux Mint 18.3 MATE (64 bit)
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    System Manufacturer/Model
    n/a
    CPU
    AMD Phenom II x6 1055T, 2.8 GHz
    Motherboard
    ASRock 880GMH-LE/USB3
    Memory
    8GB DDR3 1333 G-Skill Ares F3-1333C9D-8GAO (4GB x 2)
    Graphics Card(s)
    ATI Radeon HD6450
    Sound Card
    Realtek?
    Monitor(s) Displays
    Samsung S23B350
    Screen Resolution
    1920x1080
    Hard Drives
    Western Digital 1.5 TB (SATA), Western Digital 2 TB (SATA), Western Digital 3 TB (SATA)
    Case
    Tower
    Mouse
    Wired Optical
    Other Info
    Linux Mint 16 MATE (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 17 MATE (64 bit) - 2014-05-17
    Linux Mint 14 MATE (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 16 MATE (64 bit) - 2013-11-13
    Ubuntu 10.04 (64 bit) replaced with Linux Mint 14 MATE (64 bit) - 2013-01-14
    RAM & Graphics Card Upgraded - 2013-01-13
    Monitor Upgraded - 2012-04-20
    System Upgraded - 2011-05-21, 2010-07-14
    HDD Upgraded - 2010-08-11, 2011-08-24,

Dragon Drop

Member
Member
I've been expecting that change for years, and I'm surprised that it hasn't happened yet. Even in the 1980's with the old PC's, there were devices of that kind. You had to buy it separately (and they were rather expensive at first); you had to open up your computer and install it inside; and at every startup you had to run a program to configure it like a disk for MS-DOS. But their access time was faster than any disk drive then available. I think the main reason they didn't completely replace disks is that their capacity wasn't as big.
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    64-bit Windows 8
    System Manufacturer/Model
    HP 23-D030

Coke Robot

New Member
Pro User
Gold Member
"YEAH RIGHT!" -said everyone's cellular data plan.

"Try me, see what'll happen!" -said the United States' lack of nationwide high speed broadband service ran by companies trying to screw you over daily.

The only way cloud computing and cloud storage especially will become the norm is when everyone is running very high speed internet with no or limited data caps and increased mobile data availability with again, limited or no data caps. The mobile part is slowly getting there, the broadband isn't so much. Fiber optic data is still barely getting anywhere.

Until then, I think I'll keep growing my personal local storage array.
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Windows 8.1 Pro
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    System Manufacturer/Model
    ASUS
    CPU
    AMD FX 8320
    Motherboard
    Crosshair V Formula-Z
    Memory
    16 gig DDR3
    Graphics Card(s)
    ASUS R9 270
    Screen Resolution
    1440x900
    Hard Drives
    1 TB Seagate Barracuda (starting to hate Seagate)
    x2 3 TB Toshibas
    Windows 8.1 is installed on a SanDisk Ultra Plus 256 GB
    PSU
    OCZ 500 watt
    Case
    A current work in progres as I'll be building the physical case myself. It shall be fantastic.
    Cooling
    Arctic Cooler with 3 heatpipes
    Keyboard
    Logitech K750 wireless solar powered keyboard
    Mouse
    Microsoft Touch Mouse
    Browser
    Internet Explorer 11
    Antivirus
    Windows Defender, but I might go back on KIS 2014

MrBill

New Member
As a new server storage possibly, but the article is click bait. Data centers run in large corporations have lots of critical data. They also are run by people who like to go after things that are cheap. RAID disk configurations are cheap. (When you are running data warehouses between 9 and 200+ TB cheap matters.) While it is true that SSD is making inroads into datacenters, critical data is then backed up to disk, and then for long term storage tape is still used. Much like "big iron" the old disk tech will not be going away anytime soon. Oh, and as for folks machines, while the cloud is nice as a backup, or an easy way to share the kids photos, most people do not want it for their primary storage. They want to control their own data. For all the hype of the chromebook, used in the example, standard Linux has a bigger footprint than that device.
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Windows 7/8
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    CPU
    i7-3770k
    Motherboard
    Asus
    Memory
    16GB
    Graphics Card(s)
    NVidia 630
    Monitor(s) Displays
    LG 23 inch LED
    Screen Resolution
    1680X1050
    Hard Drives
    1 internal 1tb, 1 external 3tb

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top