You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-14 points

Just a reminder: These massive drives are really more a “budget” version of a proper tape backup system. The fundamental physics of a spinning disc mean that these aren’t a good solution for rapid seeking of specific sectors to read and write and so forth.

So a decent choice for the big machine you backup all your VMs to in a corporate environment. Not a great solution for all the anime you totally legally obtained on Yahoo.

Not sure if the general advice has changed, but you are still looking for a sweet spot in the 8-12 TB range for a home NAS where you expect to regularly access and update a large number of small files rather than a few massive ones.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Oh hey, I did something right. That’s kinda neat

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
4 points

I am troubled in my heart. I would not have been told so in this way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

HDD read rates are way faster than media playback rates, and seek times are just about irrelevant in that use case. Spinning rust is fine for media storage. It’s boot drives, VM/container storage, etc, that you would want to have on an SSD instead of the big HDD.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

And oftentimes some or all of the metadata that helps the filesystem find the files on the drive is stored in memory (zfs is famous for its automatic memory caching) so seek times are further irrelevant in the context of media playback

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

I’m real curious why you say that. I’ve been designing systems with high IOPS data center application requirements for decades so I know enterprise storage pretty well. These drives would cause zero issues for anyone storing and watching their media collection with them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*

Not sure what you’re going on about here. Even these discs have plenty of performance for read/wrote ops for rarely written data like media. They have the same ability to be used by error checking filesystems like zfs or btrfs, and can be used in raid arrays, which add redundancy for disc failure.

The only negatives of large drives in home media arrays is the cost, slightly higher idle power usage, and the resilvering time on replacing a bad disc in an array.

Your 8-12TB recommendation already has most of these negatives. Adding more space per disc is just scaling them linearly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Additionally, most media is read in a contiguous scan. Streaming media is very much not random access.

Your typical access pattern is going to be seeking to a chunk, reading a few megabytes of data in a row for the streaming application to buffer, and then moving on. The ~10ms of access time at the start are next to irrelevant. Particularly when you consider that the OS has likely observed that you have unutilized RAM and loads the entire file into the memory cache to bypass the hard drive entirely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

The fundamental physics of a spinning disc mean that these aren’t a good solution for rapid seeking of specific sectors to read and write and so forth.

It’s no ssd but is no slower than any other 12TB drive. It’s not shingled but HAMR. The sectors are closer together so it has even better seeking speed than a regular 12TB drive.

Not a great solution for all the anime you totally legally obtained on Yahoo.

???

It’s absolutely perfect for that. Even if it was shingled tech, that only slows write speeds. Unless you are editing your own video, write seek times are irrelevant. For media playback use only consistent read speed matters. Not even read seek matters except in extreme conditions like comparing tape seek to drive seek. You cannot measure 10 ms difference between clicking a video and it starting to play because of all the other delays caused by media streaming over a network.

But that’s not even relevant because these have faster read seeking than older drives because sectors are closer together.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

honestly curious, why the hell was this downvoted? I work in this space and I thought this was still the generally accepted advice?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Because everything he said was wrong?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Because people are thinking through specific niche use cases coupled with “Well it works for me and I never do anything ‘wrong’”.

I’ll definitely admit that I made the mistake of trying to have a bit of fun when talking about something that triggers the dunning kruger effect. But people SHOULD be aware of how different use patterns impacts performance, how that performance impacts users, and generally how different use patterns impact wear and tear of the drive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Come on man, everything, and mean everything you said is wrong.

Budget tape backup?

No, you can’t even begin to compare drives to tape. They’re completely different use cases. A hard drive can contain a backup but it’s not physically robust to be unplugged, rotated off site , and put into long term storage like tape. You might as well say a Honda Accord is a budget Semi tractor trailer.

Then you specifically called out personal downloads of anime as a bad use case. That’s absolutely wrong in all cases.

It is absurd to imply that everyone else except for you is less knowledgeable and using a niche case except you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Not a great solution for all the anime you totally legally obtained on Yahoo.

Mainly because of that. Spinning rust drives are perfect for large media libraries.

There isn’t a hard drive made in the last 15 years that couldn’t handle watching media files. Even the SMR crap the manufacturers introduced a while back could do that without issue. For 4k video you’re going to see average transfer speeds of 50MB/s and peak in the low 100MB/s range, and that’s for high quality videos. Write speed is irrelevant for media consumption, and unless your hard drive is ridiculously fragmented, seek speed is also irrelevant. Even an old 5400 RPM SATA drive is going to be able to handle that load 99.99% of the time. And anything lower than 4K video is a slam dunk.

Everything I just said goes right out the window for a multi-user system that’s streaming multiple media files concurrently, but the vast majority of people never need to worry about that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Do you know about tape backup systems for consumers? From my (brief) search it looks like tape is more economical at the scale used by a data center, but it seems very expensive and more difficult for consumers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So I’m guessing you don’t really know what you’re talking about.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

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


Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.7K

    Posts

  • 153K

    Comments