111–120 of 122 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modern (wired) LANs have < 1ms round-trip latency. Is that still too slow?
Yes that is really slow
I hope it will support IPv6. The article mentions DHCP and has an example address of 1.2.3.4, but IPv4 seems like a poor choice for a new LAN protocol in 2013. Not everyone has IPv6 internet connectivity but we do all have IPv6 LAN. Apple has been using IPv6 for local network services for years now, like file sharing and Time Capsule backups, and it works great.
I hope it will support IPv6. The article mentions DHCP and has an example address of 1.2.3.4, but IPv4 seems like a poor choice for a new LAN protocol in 2013. Not everyone has IPv6 internet connectivity but we do all have IPv6 LAN. Apple has been using IPv6 for local network services for years now, like file sharing and Time Capsule backups, and it works great.
Well on an internal network ipv4 is more than enough. With subnets you can put a LOT of hosts on your private network without any problems.
I think this is an incredibly interesting approach, and I hope Seagate open it up a little more. If we could run some computation on the drive, that could be incredibly powerful. I can imagine that once these are SSD drives, paired with reasonably powerful (likely ARM) chips, that we'll have massively parallel storage architectures (GPU-like architectures for storage). We'll have massive aggregate CPU disk bandwidth,…
hard drives are already run by arm controllers http://hackaday.com/2013/08/02/sprite_tm-ohm2013-talk-hackin... so your idea might happen sooner than expected
The sprite breakdown identifies one core as managing the SAS commands, via DMA. Now how hard would it be to actually manage ethernet similarly, via a ARM core? If that's what they've actually done, that's really damn cool.
I hope it will support IPv6. The article mentions DHCP and has an example address of 1.2.3.4, but IPv4 seems like a poor choice for a new LAN protocol in 2013. Not everyone has IPv6 internet connectivity but we do all have IPv6 LAN. Apple has been using IPv6 for local network services for years now, like file sharing and Time Capsule backups, and it works great.
1) Hard drive industry was the main example cited in Innovator's Dilemma. 2) Various posts pooh-pooh'ing this development (including the current top post) here are committing the classic mistake described in that book made by incumbents which leads to disruption by new entrants to the market. 3) Seagate is doing something right. It doesn't guarantee that they'll win the next phase of the storage battle but they are d…
1) Hard drive industry was the main example cited in Innovator's Dilemma. 2) Various posts pooh-pooh'ing this development (including the current top post) here are committing the classic mistake described in that book made by incumbents which leads to disruption by new entrants to the market. 3) Seagate is doing something right. It doesn't guarantee that they'll win the next phase of the storage battle but they are d…
The problem is, this isn't innovation. NASD did the same thing better fourteen years ago. Disruption could still occur if somebody would evolve those ideas in a way that makes it suit users' needs better, but AFAICT Seagate is doing the exact opposite. It's difference for the sake of difference, "disrupting" only their own business.
If they do end up selling it as individual disks directly pluggable into standard racks (with some easy means of supplying power), this certainly would count as a potentially disruptive innovation. As I said before, whether market reacts positively or not is not certain, but it never is. But kudos to Seagate for trying it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, technically you can now get into 10Gb for around $150 per port. http://www.amazon.com/Netgear-12-Port-ProSafe-Gigabit-Switch...
Which is my point, this is well over an order of magnitude more expensive than what the 1Gb consumer switches people would buy for home use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is, this isn't innovation. NASD did the same thing better fourteen years ago. Disruption could still occur if somebody would evolve those ideas in a way that makes it suit users' needs better, but AFAICT Seagate is doing the exact opposite. It's difference for the sake of difference, "disrupting" only their own business.
Jeff, if you look at my linkedin profile, you might notice that I have some background with object storage systems. I'm not familiar with any incarnation of NASD or a similar system that was sold as individual disks accessible over IP. If they do end up selling it as individual disks directly pluggable into standard racks (with some easy means of supplying power), this certainly would count as a potentially disruptiv…
A technology is only disruptive if it provides some benefit over existing alternatives. Will Kinetic be cheaper than today's drives paired with tiny ARM servers (the storage-industry disruption that is already upon us)? We won't know until Seagate actually sets prices and tries to sell some, but it doesn't seem particularly likely. Will it be faster? Again, possible but not particularly likely. Will it allow higher density and/or lower power consumption? Will it be easier to build applications on top of this new and limited API than on top of the ones we already have? Without a credible positive answer to any of these questions, how is this disruptive?
If Seagate had done this right, especially wrt security and semantics beyond get/put, this might be a better building block for a whole system. That might be disruptive. But they've made such a poor start technically that if they make a dent at all it might well be someone else who achieves the actual market breakthrough. Once Seagate has done all of the marketing, that makes it far easier for someone with a better actual implementation to succeed. Look forward to the WD/HGST Object Drive, with an API that allows you to use one securely without a server to do read-modify-write and metadata management for you. Then I'll cheer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also SSDs implement an internal filesystem optimized for flash that emulates a block device to the outside. For this Kinetic Store, the controller would be quite likely even simpler.
There would still be a need for ssd specific wear leveling and trim logic in the controller though