On Thursday 14 November 2024 22:38:59 GMT Wols Lists wrote: > On 14/11/2024 20:33, Dale wrote: > > It's one thing that kinda gets on my nerves about SMR. It seems, > > sounds, like they tried to hide it from people to make money. Thing is, > > as some learned, they don't do well in a RAID and some other > > situations. Heck, they do OK reading but when writing, they can get > > real slow when writing a lot of data. Then you have to wait until it > > gets done redoing things so that it is complete. > > Incidentally, when I looked up HAMR (I didn't know what it was) it's > touted as making SMR obsolete. I can see why ...
aaaand .... it's gone! LOL! Apparently, HDMR is on the cards to replace HAMR. > And dual actuator? I would have thought that would be good for SMR > drives. Not that I have a clue how they work internally, but I would > have thought it made sense to have zones and a streaming log-structured > layout. So when the user is using it, you're filling up the zones, and > then when the drive has "free time", it takes a full zone that has the > largest "freed/dead space" and streams it to the current zone, one > actuator to read and one to write. Indeed, it could possibly do that > while the drive is being used ... > > Cheers, > Wol As I understand it the dual actuator drives are like two separate drives placed inside the same casing, but being accessed in parallel by their respective head, hence the higher IOPS. The helium allows thinner platters which makes it possible to have higher total storage capacity within the same physical size. The SMR is more complicated in technological terms, with its overlapping multilayered recording. It achieves higher storage density than conventional drives, but with lower IOPS on writing operations once their cache is exhausted.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
