my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Hard Drives Reach 1 Terrabyte Storage (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Hard Drives Reach 1 Terrabyte Storage Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-14-2007 10:38 AM                        Exabyte. (Not to be confused with "Exabyte tapes," which were/are a crappy backup format that used/uses 8mm videotapes.) These larger capacities are great, but I just wish that backup technology would catch up. LTO3 is great, but it costs several thousand dollars and holds "only" about 400GB per tape. Not very practical for the home user. And before anyone mentions backing up to removable hard disks, I'll just say that I don't trust that a disk will be readable in a decade after sitting on a shelf for years. They just aren't that reliable.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-14-2007 02:18 PM                     Jim, From the article in the first post.... "the next level is the petabyte (a quadrillion bytes); and then the exabyte (one quintillion bytes); and then the zettabyte (one sextillion bytes); and then the yottabyte (one septillion bytes.)" quote: Scott Norwood but I just wish that backup technology would catch up. Well, A simple RAID array is not very expensive and provides pretty darn good backup. Mark  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-14-2007 04:35 PM                        RAID != backup It doesn't provide versioning, doesn't provide offsite storage, and won't help one bit if someone does something stupid (e.g. accidental file deletion, accidental reformat, etc.).  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-14-2007 05:46 PM                     Scott, You're right there... I was thinking more of HD backup in case one fails.. this has been my main problem with IDE HD's. My Seagate SCSI's are still chugging right along though with about 2.5 continous operating years on them. I only shut the puter down if I'm away for an extended time. I did however recently replace my aging power supply with a much larger more environmentally friendly one... Mark  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 04-14-2007 06:11 PM                        I hear SATA drives are less reliable than IDE or ATA or whatever the standard connection is. True?  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-14-2007 06:24 PM                     The biggest problem with SATA is its arguably poor connector design. Some people have had problems with it. As to the hard discs themselves, that's really hard to tell. SATA RAID is not as reliable as a SCSI-based solution. It can make a regular desktop computer run faster. But it also makes it doubly important that you back up your data to another physical hard disc. As cheap as massive external hard discs have become, I see little reason for anyone to avoid using them for data backup. They have about as low a price per gigabyte as any other storage medium and don't take up as much space as a growing stack of CDs and DVDs.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-14-2007 07:01 PM                     quote: Bobby Henderson I see little reason for anyone to avoid using them for data backup. They have about as low a price per gigabyte as any other storage medium and don't take up as much space as a growing stack of CDs and DVDs. I certainly agree with that and its someting that I do occasionally with my 2 spare HD's! Making a HD image or exact copy on another HD is a cinch and very inexpensive... the software to do so is also inexpensive, it doesn't even take that long. It makes more sense to me than making a tape BU copy, tape drives are slow and dam... don't get that tape near any mag field. Mark  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 04-14-2007 07:07 PM                        quote: Bobby Henderson SATA RAID is not as reliable as a SCSI-based solution. RAID-0 should never be used when reliability is the top priority. RAID-0 is for performance and capacity. Whether it's SATA or IDE/PATA, RAID-0 is more risky. Western Digital Raptor SATA drives are basically SCSI drives with an SATA interface. Very fast and very reliable. SATA connector reliability is fine if you use the cables with locking tabs on the connectors. With or without the locking tabs, you just need to be careful how the cables are routed inside the case. It's not like the SATA cables just spontaneously disconnect.  |  IP: Logged Bruce Hansen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 847 From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 04-15-2007 06:27 PM                     quote: Hard Drives Reach 1 Terrabyte Storage My one remaining brain cell is feeling very lonely right now. --> By the way, there have been water cooling units for CPUs in PCs for some time now.  |  IP: Logged Joel N. Weber II Expert Film Handler Posts: 115 From: Somerville, MA, USA Registered: Dec 2005 posted 04-15-2007 09:28 PM                     I would assume that Scott and Mark were probably talking about RAID 1, in which a complete copy of the data is stored on each drive, such that as long as at least one drive is still working, you have your data, and not RAID 0, in which the data is distributed across all of the drives in such a way that any drive failing will generally result in none of the data being easily recoverable. There are also some other configurations available, such as RAID 5, where you use several drives, writing off the capacity of one to store parity information so that any one drive in the array can fail without data loss. RAID 10 layers RAID 0 and RAID 1 together, which can be useful if you have four drives and want the usable capacity of two drives while having the whole RAID array look like a single large drive.  |  IP: Logged Wayne Keyser Master Film Handler Posts: 272 From: Arlington, Virginia, USA Registered: May 2004 posted 04-15-2007 09:59 PM                     So, let me see if I get this ... now, a single hard-drive crash can wipe out the equivalent of the entire Library of Congress? Cool!  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-16-2007 04:01 AM                     Joel, RAID -1 is exactly what I was talking about. Loose a drive--- replace it--- re-configure the new drive and keep on going without any data lose. Mark  |  IP: Logged Jason Burroughs Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 654 From: Allen, TX Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-16-2007 12:52 PM                     Bottom line: RAID is not a method of backup. With the exception of RAID 0, the different forms of RAID are simply a layer of redundancy to avoid a failure of a system while in production. RAID 0 actually poses the most risk to data integrity, as if you lose 1 drive, everything in the array is lost. SATA arrays have very limited usefulness, due to the failure rate of the drives. Primary uses are for data caching, i.e. backing up to the array and queing the job to tape.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.