Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

computerworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 147 posts

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#111

Post by reitzensteinm »

antocv wrote: post #101
pilsetnieks wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a completely different category of product than their low end consumer Evo drives, though.

Its the same company. They marketed it as warranty so and so, speed such and such, and in fact its a piece of shit, and Samsung does not stand by its own product. Even their newest Samsung EVO 850 is marketed as write speed ~500mb/s, but that is only true for the first 3gb, due to their usage of "TurboWriteCache", which means it has some kind of DRAM or faster real flash disk, and the rest of the disk is below 100mb/…

It's only good for 3gb bursts. Which is a ton of data to write to a consumer drive at one time. It's also 6gb/12gb for 500gb/1tb drives.

It's a perfectly fine tradeoff for a consumer drive. Just because it doesn't fit your use case doesn't make it junk.

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#112

Post by discreditable »

antocv wrote: post #97

Samsung can try to sell me 100TB SSD, and Ill decline thanks. Their EVO drives suffer from read degradation slowly over long periods of time. See EVO 840, after about a year it was down to 20MiB/s of continuous read speed. An SSD they call that thing. They refused warranty and released a "Speed up flash warez tool now.exe" as help, which all it did was move the data around on the SSD in the background so as to keep u…

Their Pro series drives have not been affected by any of the EVO issues to my knowledge.

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#113

Post by randallsquared »

Razengan wrote: post #103
adevine wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But biological storage also doesn't have the random access characteristics and read/write speeds of this storage.

Does it need them? My memory seems to hold a lot of things, and the ability to look them up instantly (not counting the decompression delay AKA tip-of-the-tongue syndrome where you know you know something but can't recall it until it suddenly comes to you.)

If it comes to you. Sometimes biomemory just fails. In fact, it fails a whole lot, but the layer that does the access often just makes up something plausible to cover that fact. :)

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#114

Post by maxerickson »

dahart wrote: post #68
dorfsmay wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our brain thinks linear, technology grows exponentially. http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns

Kurzweil also claims, as the capstone final paragraph in this piece, that human life expectancy is on an exponential curve, which is false. Not just a little wrong, it's all the way wrong, and intentionally misleading, there's no possible way he doesn't know it's false. It's very easy to check the basic facts: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy . Lifespan for people who live past 20 (discounting infant m…

I think you are understating the improvements in adult life expectancy. 1000 years ago, the very wealthy (the aristocrats) were getting to their 60s. The population wasn't.

The improvements have mostly come from violence reduction and public health and dealing with disease though, I agree that those things aren't really part of a life extension technology trajectory.

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#115

Post by rbanffy »

ymse wrote: post #3
NovaS1X wrote: post #2

Impressive. First question that pops into mind is how long the rebuild time would take if one of these failed in a RAID. I can imagine it'll take a while.

It takes 8 hours 20 minutes to write 15TB over 500MBps. Why would you want to stick one of these in a RAID though? ..it would be more like Redundant Array of Prohibitively Expensive Drives. (I'll show myself out)

RAPD is a catchy acronym.

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#116

Post by rbanffy »

eropple wrote: post #42
laurencerowe wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An SSD is implemented a little like a RAID array internally. Higher capacity SSDs have more flash chips and tend to be faster. So one would expect that 2 x 128GB drives in RAID 0 to perform similarly to a single 256GB drive.

Wouldn't being able to offload to multiple SSD controllers potentially help too if that's the bottleneck?

It would - you'd have the aggregate bandwidth of the multiple controllers to use. Similarly, RAID-1 is better for random reads than RAID-0.

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#117

Post by jrcii »

BillyParadise wrote: post #106
antocv wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its the same company. They marketed it as warranty so and so, speed such and such, and in fact its a piece of shit, and Samsung does not stand by its own product. Even their newest Samsung EVO 850 is marketed as write speed ~500mb/s, but that is only true for the first 3gb, due to their usage of "TurboWriteCache", which means it has some kind of DRAM or faster real flash disk, and the rest of the disk is below 100mb/…

So you wouldn't use a high end Cisco router because they make the crappy "cisco small business" line?

I don't know about routers but I've had very good experiences with Cisco's SMB switches like the SG500.

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#118

Post by theandrewbailey »

rbanffy wrote: post #115
ymse wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes 8 hours 20 minutes to write 15TB over 500MBps. Why would you want to stick one of these in a RAID though? ..it would be more like Redundant Array of Prohibitively Expensive Drives. (I'll show myself out)

RAPD is a catchy acronym.

You mean RAPED?

Re: Samsung ships the world's highest capacity SSD, with 15TB of storage

#120

Post by dahart »

maxerickson wrote: post #114
dahart wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kurzweil also claims, as the capstone final paragraph in this piece, that human life expectancy is on an exponential curve, which is false. Not just a little wrong, it's all the way wrong, and intentionally misleading, there's no possible way he doesn't know it's false. It's very easy to check the basic facts: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy . Lifespan for people who live past 20 (discounting infant m…

I think you are understating the improvements in adult life expectancy. 1000 years ago, the very wealthy (the aristocrats) were getting to their 60s. The population wasn't. The improvements have mostly come from violence reduction and public health and dealing with disease though, I agree that those things aren't really part of a life extension technology trajectory.

I think you misunderstand my point. If you take away all early mortality factors, lifespan is long, and always has been. Separating the burgeoisie is actually an important piece of this argument, and it reinforces what I'm saying. Healthy adults that don't die of diseases or violence often lived as long as healthy adults today. Aristocrats a thousand years ago, on average lived to 65, but bunches of them made it to 80 and beyond. The same factors you cited lowered the lifespan a little for the entire population, even the adults. If I had data on people that only died of old age, I would use that instead, and that would (and probably still does) favor the rich.

If you solve all of these things, then lifespan is asymptotically something like 80 years. That is plain as day. We might come up with ways to increase lifespan, but we haven't yet, and none of the data Kurzweil shows are a result of increases in lifespan for people who die of old age.

Post reply on HN