Hard drive technology :fawk:

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by FyreDaug, Aug 17, 2006.

  1. FyreDaug

    FyreDaug lolswift

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    23,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    I was just about to use this as a reply to the Dual core vs pentium 4 thread, but its a thread in its own..


    I want to see hard drives pick up. Why are we doing all this work on making corvettes faster when we should work on speeding up the cavaliers. Because they all have to cross the line at the same time. Fuck quad core opterons, its an unneccessary improvement right now. Dual core is a huge step up, lets sit back and think of how to make hard drives faster. 150mbs? Cant a 500mhz celeron process more data than that?

    This is what we should be focusing on, something like this: http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=448346

     
  2. Cat in a Hat

    Cat in a Hat New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    I can't wait for RAM like HDDs, but I do wish that they would come out sooner.
     
  3. crontab

    crontab (uid = 0)

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2000
    Messages:
    23,441
    Likes Received:
    12
    2 cores, 4 cores, 8 cores; It isn't always about horsepower. In the pc market, arguable yes, but in the server market, if one can get the same performance from an 8-way box vs a single socket 8 core box that consumes less power, emminates less heat, much smaller foot print, cheaper, the 8 core box is a clear winner.

    That theory at ocforums is nothing new, already exists in a way, not on a single disk of course, but with arrays and controllers with write back cache, cache batterys, etc. Old old theories and old old technologies even back in the VAX days. No need to reinvent the wheel. He doesn't mention the interface or bus this half ram/half spindle hdd will use though. Anyway, one aspect of that drunken spiel that surprised me was the price:

    $200 for a 74 GB spindle, and 74GB of RAM?!?

    1.) One is not going get 74 GB of functional RAM for $200, maybe $2000 for cheap shit RAM.

    2.) Did he think of the size of this particular hdd? The largest DIMM's I have are 4 GB DIMM's. 18 of these DIMM's isn't going to fit in a pc.

    There are pci ram hdd's, that don't perform as well as one thinks due to the limitation of the bus.

    I wouldn't be surprised if the next hot pc geek fad would be cheap arrays with cheap fiber hba's. Altough I don't know of anyone that even makes a cheap transciever, or even an old GBIC. This things are still a few hundred bucks.
     
  4. FyreDaug

    FyreDaug lolswift

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    23,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    74gb of ram capable of 1gbs, or even less than that. With the amount of technological advancements now, if we were to re introduce old methods (ie, cheaper doesnt need to be as fast) main stream into these and got a contract to build these, then yes $200 is doable.

    PCI Ram drives are useless.

    And yes this theory is new, nothing has been done like the way this performs.
     
  5. crontab

    crontab (uid = 0)

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2000
    Messages:
    23,441
    Likes Received:
    12
    Heh, a lot of assumptions here. But if you still feel that 74GB of old technology ram will still cost $200, okay, whatever.

    And to repeat, how is this going to fit in the pc, let alone a hard drive bay slot?
     
  6. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    RAM is thin, in case you haven't noticed. You could probably fit 36 2GB sticks of it in a 3.5" bay. As for the price...that would take a lot of advancement before it would cost $200.
     
  7. Penguin Man

    Penguin Man Protect Your Digital Liberties

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Messages:
    21,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    Yeah, just stick the RAM in there, that'll work great!

    You need a lot more hardware than just DIMMs of RAM to make a functional solid-state hard drive.
     
  8. crontab

    crontab (uid = 0)

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2000
    Messages:
    23,441
    Likes Received:
    12
    .

    Guess no one here understands the interfaces, bridges, and controllers behind memory. How about EMF and static fields? All will negate can cancel to zero on a 3.5 x 1 x 6+ inch area right? But again, I forgot that this is C&P.

    Now I remember why I don't reply anymore.
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2006
  9. piratepenguin

    piratepenguin New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ireland
    Just fill your computer with RAM and mount a RAM disk. Linux has a neat 'ramfs', described here.

    72Gb RAM won't be affordable for a long long time. What would be cool now would be a script/mechanism to make the most of a 1Gb (or so) ramfs, so files are intelligently copied into RAM according to how likely they'll be needed in the near future (which would be a hard algorithm to write). If just everything Firefox, amaroK, GAIM, kate and gnome-terminal ever wanted would stay in RAM then I'd be happy (I could set that up now though with a normal ramfs). And if it would copy everything enemy territory and bzflag wanted in whenever I exit amaroK then that would be cool (since the only reason I close my music application is to play games).

    I can't imagine an intelligent script to do all that and still be good for everyone else, though. I guess if we could set our own rules it'd work much better.

    edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperdrive_(storage) seems related.
     
  10. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't be stupid. Of course it would take work. The point is, this guy wants to see that work get done.
     
  11. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    It would definitely be better if the RAM disk were configurable, as was originally suggested. I'm amused, though, that you thought to customize it with a programming language and I thought to use a visual interface. You linux people and your command prompts.
     
  12. Boogieman117

    Boogieman117 PSN: Boogieman117

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    17,554
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    20678/20657 area
    I want to make sure I'm clear on what you're saying.. you want HD's to work harder and process faster? If that's the case, below is my reply. I wanted to verify the question first...

    The only way that HD's are going to 'work better' is to probably upgrade the type of media connecting them (I hear SATA II is coming in the future). Also, wouldn't the RPM's of the drives have to be upgraded also?

    I know that 7,200 RPM HD's are the norm, and 10,000 RPM HD's are for hardcome gamers and servers and such, but to get to the Spinal Tab '11th notch', wouldn't you have to increase these speeds as well? I know that some CD's explode due to centrofusion (sp?) if there's a crack in the CD at 52x, but would you really want that for your HD?
     
  13. crontab

    crontab (uid = 0)

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2000
    Messages:
    23,441
    Likes Received:
    12
    The SATA interface already can theoretically handle 3 Gb/s and no single drive or home pc controller raid set can touch that.

    There are already 15k drives. But drives, which are mechanical pieces of hardware can only push out so much. There has yet to be a cost-effective revolutionary form of storage that keeps up with the I/O that of other components.

    If you watch mythbusters, that myth is partially busted. You can make it explode, but you need to spin the cd at ~8k in order to break it. No drive nowadays can do that. They used some tools outside of a cd drive.
     
  14. piratepenguin

    piratepenguin New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ireland
    The process that'll manage the ramdisk will read the rules from a file, that a GUI, a human or a script might write. Whoever writes the program won't necessarily be a usability expert and he mightn't know any toolkits, and if he does he won't know every toolkit.

    It's like iptables, the Linux packet filter. The guys who wrote that, should they have written a "visual interface" to it? Yea right, they were kernel hackers! They wrote a library to modify the filtering rules and made a basic program on top of it. And they did that well. Then the Firestarter guys who do know how to write pretty good graphical programs came along and made a nice graphical interface. And they did that well.

    And that's how it works and it works, and not just for people with a GUI.
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2006
  15. FusionZ06

    FusionZ06 /\__/\__/\__0>

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    86,918
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunshine State
    Solid state HD's are the future.
     
  16. FyreDaug

    FyreDaug lolswift

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    23,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah it can handle 3gb/s. But we dont need that. THe price of 200 was something I just threw out there, but I imagine if something like this was mainstream and they used some sort of cheaper memory modules (since its not really RAM anymore in this case)

    But why are we talking about increasing the speed of rotation? We dont need to do that. By the time the computer finishes posting (say it takes 12 seconds and the hard drive can transmit 65mb/s. In that 12 seconds we would have already cached 780 MB, and if we can transfer 1gb/s from the "cache" we could pretty much have the whole OS up and running already. This coupled with a quad core opteron, 4gb of ddr2 and a killer SLI setup would be set for 10 years in the future (well.......)
     
  17. Coottie

    Coottie BOOMER......SOONER OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    32,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OKC
    IMO the issue is more complex then just the rotational speed of the drive or it's bandwidth. You also have issues of seek time, rotational delays and file fragmentation (both internal and external) to contend with. All of these impair "drive speed" as well.

    But is the OP really saying that Intel or AMD should stop with their designs of new chips and enter the HD manufacturing business?? Or did I miss something?
     
  18. FyreDaug

    FyreDaug lolswift

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    23,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    No im not saying to stop their design, but the computer market should be devoting more time to hard drives. We are still basically using the same technology as we were 15 years ago. Not for processors though
     
  19. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Solid-state is faster, to be sure, but it won't be electrical RAM that takes on the job of storing people's data. I'm betting on holographic storage; a transparent cube containing fluorescent chemicals that can be turned on and off. Because of the properties of holographic materials, a single reader can access the entire contents of the medium simultaneously. It's the best of hard drives (cheap because they only have a single reader) and RAM (simultaneous access to all data). Now all they have to do is make it affordable.
     
  20. Coottie

    Coottie BOOMER......SOONER OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    32,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OKC
    Yeah but you act like this isn't happening. Look at the amazing advances in USB drives. Back a couple of years ago, I picked up a 16MB version for around $30 or so. Earlier this year I found a 1GB drive for only $80. I'd call that some serious advancement.

    I'm wondering why we don't see this USB drive technology being adapted for internal useage. Or perhaps they are working on that and I just don't know about it.
     
  21. FyreDaug

    FyreDaug lolswift

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    23,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Okay yeah USB drives are increasing, but that technically a different technology. Its flash memory, where as the hard drive platters are magnetically stored. Advancement yes, but still 1gb? :ugh: thats not really doing its part yet
     
  22. Coottie

    Coottie BOOMER......SOONER OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    32,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OKC
    But why do you care what the tech is?? I mean isn't you point to speed up storage access times? So if we switch techs, boom...prob solved.

    Or do you just like disk drives?

    I mean the quote in your OP is actually different tech also but you seem to like that solution. Or am I missing something.
     
  23. FyreDaug

    FyreDaug lolswift

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    23,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    well my last post went a little off base, but it doesnt matter what the technology is aslong as its faster, but USB is only up to 1gb... well more like 4 I Think, but thats nothing, and USB is limited by the USB bus speed
     
  24. Coottie

    Coottie BOOMER......SOONER OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    32,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OKC
    Yep USB is limited by bus speeds and and it's nowhere near as large as we need. However, my point was arguing more for solid state storage devices, not so much USB drives. Sorry for the confusion.

    I'm just wondering if this type of storage could be interfaced with the different drive technologies out there.

    In your original post you mention reading the entire contents of the drive upon boot into RAM. That's a very long read and file fragmentation would cause hella delays...or are you saying just image the drive to RAM as is? Then you get into the whole tranlation of file pointer issue (changing from a block address to a RAM address). That would definately increase the read time.
     
  25. FyreDaug

    FyreDaug lolswift

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    23,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah it would copy all the data onto the memory, but not neccesarily all. If its like a 500gig drive then yeah itll take some time. You could probably cache up the games you want, the software you use, windows etc. And leave things you dont commonly use (like movies, music or whatever) to reduce the time it takes to cache it. But mainly it reads off of the cache, so even as its copying data onto the cache its not gonna slow ANYTHING down when its reading from the spindle and copying onto the cache, so you can still game and everything without lag while it finishes caching everything. Having the drive read for 60 mins and shut off and leave the computer on 24/7 is much better than just leaving it on 24/7. Reliability will go up too, because no matter what happens (crash/etc) the spindle still has the data... atleast as a backup so your not losing everything.

    And in the OP it says that only the changed items will be updated onto the spindle. So if you only read data nothing needs to be changed (maybe it can keep a list of last accessed etc in a text file or something near the MBR for all files, just so you still have that option), so when you restart you can chose to update, restore or do nothing(just restart the OS). Restarting would be nearly instantly. Restore would go back to the spindle and re-read everything and re-cache (something fucked up maybe? its like an easy system restore) and update will re-write updated files.
     

Share This Page