this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2024
385 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

60058 readers
2807 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

Imagine how slow these would be

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago

How to lose EVERYTHING in one go.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago

Until you scratch it

[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The article didn't say if it's rewritable

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

Even if you can just add to it, you could have some sort of journalism file system to replace or delete previous files in newer records.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Unless the 1.6petabytes is all photos you have ever taken of people and all the photos and videos everyone has ever taken of you and all your family, I hope there's a way for a person to wrap their mind around having 1.6petabits. maybe it's a big text file that draws your name from random text characters to the order of 1.6petabits. it could be mostly just zeros.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 10 months ago (2 children)

How long would it take to burn one? I remember when CD writers came out, and burning a disk at 1x meant the 60-70 minute wait.

As a back-up solution, I do like it. I'm wondering what the cost will be.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh, is that what those multiples meant? I never realized.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's the number of times faster it can read or burn compared to the original speed of reading and burning

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Does the 'original speed' mean what the natural playback would have been? So 60 minutes of audio burned by a x60 drive would take one minute?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but I think there was some overhead in the process that was slower.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Memory limitations. Back then RAM was like 512 max

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

You are correct. However, I mean initialization and finalizing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CD-R Looks like a 52x wrote at 7.8 MB/s. Things have changed.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 10 months ago

Since the realistic competitor here is probably magnetic tape, current-generation (LTO9) media can transfer at around 400MB/s, taking 12 hours and change to fill an 18TB tape.

Earlier archival optical disk formats (https://news.panasonic.com/global/stories/798) claimed 360MB/s, but I believe that is six, double-sided discs writing both sides simultaneously, so 30MB/s per stream. Filling the same six (300GB) discs would take about an hour and a half.

Building the library to handle and read/write in bulk is always the issue though. The above optical system fit 1.9PB in the space of a server rack (and I didn't see any options to expand further when that was current technology), and by the looks is 7 units that each can be writing a set of discs (call that 2.5GB/s total).

In the same single rack you'd fit 560 LTO tapes (10.1PB for LTO9) and 21 drives (8.4GB/s).

So they have a bit of catching up to do, especially with LTO10 (due in the next year or so) doubling the capacity and further increasing the throughput.

There's also the small matter that every one of these massive increases in optical disc capacity in recent years has turned out to be vapourware. I mean I don't doubt that they will achieve it someday, but they always seem to go nowhere.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I'd said over on the Old Place back during the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD wsrs that people really liked their 7" optical media. I got down voted to hell for it then, but I'm glad to see I wasn't totally wrong.

Cheap, high density media has its applications. Tape is still the preferred long-term storage medium for backups in a lot of industy sectors because still stores gobs of data, it's dirt cheap, compact, light and it transports easily. If you don't need it to be fast, or you're regularly producing large scale data sets that are essentially disposable after some time, then it's a good compromise.

No reason this tech couldn't step into that niche when it hits the right price point.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I absolutely agree with you, hovewer lto-9 18tb tape costs same money 20tb hdd costs

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yea but the tape is likely to last the 20-30 year estimate. You couldn't say the same about HDDs especially the helium sealed ones.

Whether the tape drive will survive as well is another question but between the simpler mechanism, a drive 2 generations ahead can still read the tape, parts inter-compatibility if you needed to frankenstein an older drive with new rollers and motors and just plain buying and keeping drives sealed in storage as new-old-stock ahead of time. You have a few options to choose from.

Where as with HDDs you may have to repair each one. The helium ones you may have to re-gas.

Tape sounds like a better long term archival/backup approach.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Long term yes, i absolutely agree with you, however, you sure you'll survive next 20-30 years? For datahoarders and home server solutions 20tb hdd is better, while as you've said and i agree with you that for long term storage tape is better, but with speed of web development nowadays, archived data will become obsolete blazingly fast, so lto tapes is very special case while HDDs offer more memory for the same price and designed for constant rewrites and have more layman interface (sata) so they better for your average home server data hoarder

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Well I'm in my mid 20's so I'm hoping for at least that long :). No I won't likely need alot of what I store to last that long although I am a member of r/DataHoarder (not sure if they're on lemmy yet) but for a few items like family photos/videos it's nice to have it written in a way that I can mostly just set and forget. With the standardization and open source implementation of LTFS you have even less worry about having the software to read it in the future. A SAS IT mode HBA and linux with a git clone of the LTFS repo is all you need.

In terms of cost the drive was very expensive ($2500 NOS from eBay US) but if you treat that as the one off entry cost, the tapes are cheaper for me to buy than the equivalent in HDDs here in Australia. That's comparing ~$460 20tb EXOS HDDs from serverpartdeals.com to $43 x 8 = $344 2.5TB LTO-6 from stutchdata.com.au.

Also I store the tapes in IP67 boxes from bunnings along with a pack of desiccant and put the boxes in a cool but damp area. Don't really have alot of choice where I live. It's either that or hot daily temperature swings. Basement vs attic/garage.

I hope that's enough to store them correctly environmentally speaking. I am in the process of working out how to clean family VHS tapes that were not stored correctly and that's not an operation I want to revisit. An extended project is to make 900mhz button cell humidity/temperature monitors to notify me when desiccant has expired.

This may seem excessive but I would argue most don't do enough in an age where more and more is being stored digitally as the only copy rather than print, etc. I feel this is a small price to pay to keep the still more compact and convenient all digital lifestyle without the data loss issues most people experience. The drive was expensive to buy into but with how little I use it I hope it's going to last a long time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah i agree with you, most people don't do archives of data, and if you do archive then lto tapes is the best, hovewer most data hoarders just like me just wanna hoard data, just as simple as that, no deep meaning, and for casual hoarding server stocked with hdds with zfs and deduplication and compression is just the right fit, however, i feel you, data needs to be archived for future since corporations isn't interested in this, and games, videos, music, and many many more other things i can't even imagine just disappearing without archiving, so those who archives is MVP, but most data hoarders is just guys and gals who just want to have autonomous library of media on their home server/lab, so while i feel and understand and support your idea, what I've been trying to say is, most people want autonomous library and as cheap as possible, HDDs are better for it while for archive purposes lto is the best as we agreed in our previous comments, and about surviving, I've seen enough cases when people die just like that and current geo political situation ain't helping, also if you frequently read bad news publics then you'll know that literary anything may happen, car crash, aneurysm, some rando going on a rampage, some gas explosion, some fire, some drunk courageous blokes wanting to have violent fun while you wandering in evening, so i prefer just setting long term goals and doing them, and yes, I'm mid 20s just like you, however seeing how people can just die in their daily life, i ain't betting on anything, just doing my goals, that's it

load more comments
view more: next ›