Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Ships 15.38TB SSD With Up To 1,200MBps Performance (computerworld.com)
Lucas123 writes: Samsung announced it is now shipping the world's highest capacity 2.5-in SSD, the 15.38TB PM1633a. The new SSD uses a 12Gbps SAS interface and is being marketed for use in enterprise-class storage systems where IT managers can fit twice as many of the drives in a standard 19-inch, 2U rack compared to an equivalent 3.5-inch drive. The PM1633a sports random read/write speeds of up to 200,000 and 32,000 IOPS, respectively. It delivers sequential read/write speeds of up to 1,200MBps, the company said. The SSD can sustain one full drive write (15.38TB) per day, every day over its life, which Samsung claims is two to ten times more data than typical SATA SSDs based on planar MLC and TLC NAND flash technologies. The SSD is based on Samsung's 48-layer V-NAND (3D NAND) technology, which also uses 3-bit MLC flash. Also at Hot Hardware
I could REALLY use that for my gaming rig.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
15.38 TB? That's only like 1 Library of Congress.
"where IT managers can fit twice as many of the drives in a standard 19-inch, 2U rack compared to an equivalent 3.5-inch drive." LOL! Who ARE these editors? Fresh out of high school?
That's it? I remember people dropping $3000 on a 30MB hard drive. Small business people. When $3000 was half the cost of a new car. Back whenn Americans were wealthier, in real terms.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Nobody will ever need more that 30TB hard drive space. They can fit any extra on a 5 1/4" floppy.
Not a counter argument, but VSAN will/should put most raid arrays out of business too.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
The 1 -> 2Mb upgrade on my first PC cost more than that.
Imagine a beowulf cluster of those.
I have been working on enterprise-grade applications running on Raspberry-Pi type of computers. In this case, less is more (less trashing resources produce better usage). And it is possible to execute transactional monitors with a mere 6 megabyte of RAM, so the overall 1 gigabyte of memory on those machines is good enough for complex tasks when it is wisely used.
And now we have more than 15 terabyte SSDs that it is like to lost a needle not on a haystack but on the milky way.
Of course, it is possible to use that space on gaming or raw video storage, even on hungry relational database storage, but what could be done when working with care? There are applications only the imagination can figure about this type of fast, power saving and huge storage. And there are other consequences also: better and cheaper low level SSDs ( ) for general usage, that could really break the hard-disk kingdom.
Better off with an PCI-e one. Cheaper too as this will also need a high end SAS card as well to make use of that speed.
with 4 X16 PCI-e video cards (running at full pci-e 3.0 speed) + pci-e based boot disk.
Natalie Portman, hot grits, etc.
A beowulf cluster of Natalie Portman's porn? No....wait...
I'd rather have 2-3TB at a price that's not going to leave me eating ramen for the next few months than a 15TB that's going to leave me eating ramen for the two years.
Actually, I'd like to be able to afford two. Redundancy and all...
My 32TB file server is down to 200GB free. I've got another TB worth of Blu-rays to backup
Have you got no shame, violating good laws such as the DMCA like that? Criminal. If you want a copy of a movie you bought on Blu-ray on your computer, you must buy it again!
VSAN has proven unreliable in our environment, with no real answers from VMWare. We have pulled it from production do to machines just dropping offline when a disk has timing issues.
Yes, we used nothing but VMWare approved hardware and run in a sanitized environment. They can't explain what is wrong, and haven't been able to fix the issue. Unstable environments aren't "Enterprise" ready.
VSAN looked promising, and the promises were such that we bought it. The reality is that it isn't ready IMHO. We wish we could get our money back. Yeah, it is that bad.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Oh I feel old....
"Hmm. I am to metaphor cheese as metaphor cheese is to transitive verb crackers!"
And I've heard many more people having success with it.
In fact, googling for vsan failure turns up very few accounts, even in the vmware forums where people complain about everything.
I haven't tested it out myself yet - hardware costs real money - but most VMware sysadmins see the real benefits to it & are testing the waters.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
For this performance and density, the $6000 mentioned by the AC above (a fictitious number I'm assuming, since I can't find any references to an actual price) would be pretty good, if it were true. That's under $400/TB. Consumer-grade drives were at that price/TB not too long ago, for much worse performance and density.
In an early Star Trek: The Next Generation, Data states that his storage capacity is 800 TB. With just 50 of these we match 24th century computers. We should measure storage in units of Data now.
The PM1633a sports random read/write speeds of up to 200,000 and 32,000 IOPS.
Those are rather lopsided performance spec's - random reads more than six times as fast as random writes. There are much smaller SSD's that offer random read/write speeds of 460,000 and 290,000 IOPS, for example.
For some applications the larger, slower SSD's may be fine, but for database applications those random write spec's are pretty lacklustre.
I'm just telling you our experience. Support from VMWare hasn't been able to resolve our issue (and they have tried).
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
i will believe 1.2Gbps when i see it in a respectable review site.
You should check out reviews of Samsung's _consumer_ PCI-e M.2 SSDs, then. This thing is not that fast by comparison - it's just very dense.
The Backblaze implementation of top-loading drives is one well-known example. They've 45 drives in 3U (or 4U?) for many years.
https://www.backblaze.com/blog...
Nowadays you can order a 90-bay top loader off the shelf from Super Micro:
http://www.supermicro.com/prod...
Once your format the drive, you're prob'ly left with about 3.5TB of usable space.
Bah!
Reeses
vSANs are going to be more popular once Windows Server 2016 hits the server rooms, because of Storage Spaces Direct. Of course, it would be nice if one could interconnect machines via Infiniband like Isilon nodes do, but even though the technology is somewhat shaky as of now, the buzzword of hyperconvergence is out there, and there may be use cases for it, where one can just add more compute nodes and gain more disk space to the backing store.
Will it replace a SAN? Not really. In fact, it seems like enterprises are moving to stuff like Tintri and PureStorage, because those tend to be better for the specialized purposes of having the I/O needed for virtualization. vSANs do have their place, but it will be hard to convince people to stop using their tried and true fiber channel fabric, especially for production critical tasks. Eventually, just like virtualization and SANs, it will wind up in production server farms, but vSAN stuff will have to earn its bones first, just like any new technology.
They had 30 MB HDs in the seventies? Tell you what though, in the late eighties, I looked into getting a Mac, a scanner, and a laser printer. The whole rig came to around ten grand. I had to wait until the late nineties.
-- sudon't
Air-ride Equipped
Sure they did. IBM introduced the 3330 disk, a 100 MB harddisk in June 1970. It was even hot swappable. See 3330 disk to get an idea of what it looked like. Note the handle on the top to facilitate mounting and dismounting it. It did not sell very well among home users though.