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

Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

nexthive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 223 posts

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#171

Post by kalleboo »

saltcured wrote: post #107
loeg wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you, but 500-1000 GB is more than enough for my SSD needs, so the comparison at 1TB is much more relevant to me than at 4TB.

Wasn't the parent discussion about a new high-capacity HDD and the per-capacity cost of HDD vs SSD? I don't think that people satisfied with under 1TB are relevant to that topic. In that market, people are comparing a pile of disks in an array to a pile of solid state storage needed to replace its capacity. The bulk price of storage inverts when it is cheaper to store hundreds of TB on huge SSDs rather than on huge H…

> a pile of disks in an array to a pile of solid state storage

It doesn't even need to be a pile of disks. Even for a PC the differences are big.

My computer has a 1 TB SSD which is a decent size for an SSD. It's still a bit tight for me, so I complement with a spinny rust NAS. If I had an HDD instead it would have been like 8 TB and I wouldn't necessarily need the NAS. I think that's what GP is hinting at when he says "me SSD needs". I think he's also complementing with HDD somewhere for bulk storage (be it external drive, NAS or even cloud storage)

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#172

Post by kalleboo »

notacoward wrote: post #134

As a professional storage-system developer, my reaction to every announcement of larger disks is something close to horror. Capacity keeps increasing while performance remains darn near constant, so the gap between the two keeps getting wider. Yes, we can use flash to absorb the I/O demand, treat disk more like tape, yadda yadda, but all of that takes significant effort. You do want your storage system to be correct…

Even as a home user, expanding a RAID on a consumer NAS with a 10 TB harddisk takes days due to the size. It would take weeks with a 100 TB drive! (then again, that's not something you'd need to do often with 100 TB to play with :)

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#173

Post by kalleboo »

dlevine wrote: post #22

I know that big disks are useful for a lot of people/applications. However, I topped out at 500GB about 10 years ago. That gives me plenty of headroom. Since then, I have gone from a 500GB HDD to a SSD, but my space usage hasn't really gone up. The largest disk I own is a 1TB disk in my Time Capsule (which I could probably stand to upgrade, but I don't feel like taking it apart). I think this is probably because I st…

My photo library is 400 GB alone. And I don't even own a camera, that's all photos taken with my phone! No RAW or anything fancy like that, the worst thing in there are short clips of highly-compressed 4K HEVC. And it's ever-growing as I have a kid, a second one on the way...

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#174

Post by kalleboo »

anoncoward111 wrote: post #169
votepaunchy wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Buy hard drives in pairs and put an item on your calendar to pop the other one in once a month, sync it, and put it back in a fire-resistant safe. Alternatively, buy one hard drive and keep a copy in Amazon Glacier Deep Archive for $1/TB-month.

And then wait weeks and pay real money to pull it all back if you have 8TB :)

Yeah it's something like $700 to retrieve 8 TB

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#175

Post by loeg »

kalleboo wrote: post #171
saltcured wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't the parent discussion about a new high-capacity HDD and the per-capacity cost of HDD vs SSD? I don't think that people satisfied with under 1TB are relevant to that topic. In that market, people are comparing a pile of disks in an array to a pile of solid state storage needed to replace its capacity. The bulk price of storage inverts when it is cheaper to store hundreds of TB on huge SSDs rather than on huge H…

> a pile of disks in an array to a pile of solid state storage It doesn't even need to be a pile of disks. Even for a PC the differences are big. My computer has a 1 TB SSD which is a decent size for an SSD. It's still a bit tight for me, so I complement with a spinny rust NAS. If I had an HDD instead it would have been like 8 TB and I wouldn't necessarily need the NAS. I think that's what GP is hinting at when he sa…

If I'm GP, yeah; I use 250-500GB SSDs as primary disk and have a small NAS with a RAID1 of two 5 TB disks for slow archival storage. For that slow archive, though, I don't care what factor SSD price is to HDD price (as long as it's still >1.0).

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#176

Post by captainperl »

iamgopal wrote: post #170
blattimwind wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but a spinning-disk drive looks 100 times more complicated to me to manufacture. Fun-fact: The "head fly height", i.e. the distance from the underside of the R/W head to the platter surface, is less than a handful nanometers in most hard drives; this makes the gap not just smaller than any production transistor, but also smaller than any production feature size.

How?

Boundary-layer aerodynamics. The head is literally flying on a cushion of air.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#177

Post by int_19h »

blattimwind wrote: post #166
nine_k wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe an SSD under a heavy datacenter I/O load is indeed less reliable than an HDD. But in a laptop , a device that you lug around, move around while working, and sometimes even drop, a precise mechanical device has a much larger chance to misbehave, to my mind. Its I/O load is way lower than in the datacenter, too.

Used to be that whole series of SSDs had data corruption problems (which in one case ultimately lead to the demise of the manufacturer). Still happens. Recent example: Apple. Power failure behavior of most consumer oriented SSDs is also data corrupting.

Used to be that entire series of HDDs had data corruption problems, too.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#178

Post by anoncoward111 »

kalleboo wrote: post #174
anoncoward111 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then wait weeks and pay real money to pull it all back if you have 8TB :)

Yeah it's something like $700 to retrieve 8 TB

Meanwhile for highly redundant tape cartridges, you can store that amount for maybe $100-200, but the device to read it back is about 10x more expensive used unless I am just struggling the find the real deals :/

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#179

Post by rb666 »

donatj wrote: post #146
zrav wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistics with representative sample size disagree. https://www.backblaze.com/blog/2018-hard-drive-failure-rates...

I don't know if you're looking at the same list I am, because the large Seagate disks on here have some of the highest failure rates outside WDC.

The Seagate 8TB has an AFR of around 1%, this is not only really good, but also makes any anecdotal evidence from a consumer quite useless.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#180

Post by Kye »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #119
Paperweight wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DAWs usually encode as WAVs for when you're working on stuff because it's faster. But it would be nice for them to losslessly compress your files down to FLAC when you're done and shut down the program! It would be interesting to have a media-friendly archive file format for the final tracks of completed projects that automatically compresses/decompresses WAVs as FLAC...and other raw data formats as their losslesss c…

> it would be nice for them to losslessly compress your files down to FLAC when you're done and shut down the program! Renoise does that. With software synths and sample-based instruments, the biggest chunk for me is always the vocals.. and I would have to have a lot of takes to get over 100mb. Of course, my music isn't the music people who record a bunch of live instruments make, it's not a fair comparison, but stil…

You can attach zip files containing anything you want on Bandcamp. I put a few Serum presets in one EP.
Post reply on HN