Sign in to follow this  
Spod

300gb Scsi Drive

Recommended Posts

seagate, Fujitsu and maxtor all stop at 4 platters these days for 10k and 15k disks...

so who knows... to be safe you might want to steer clear of the 5 platter design... Personally, I can't afford that large of a SCSI drive so it's not a concern of mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why no SAS interface?

Why the bizzare 60GB platters for multiples of 36GB drive size? The 72GB model uses two platters, no better than the last generation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was just reading this over at Register, so I'll copy pste here as it's an interesting read.

-----------------------

Hitachi Global Storage Technologies is claiming its Ultrastar 10K300 is the industry's first 300GB enterprise hard drive. Due next quarter in Ultra 320 SCSI or 2GB Fibre Channel forms, the 10,000 RPM drive has five platters and 10 heads, and can sustain 89MB/sec.

Although described as a server drive, it is really intended for the storage subsystem market, where it is the likes of EMC, IBM and HDS which really define what makes a drive enterprise-class. They also want high storage densities to quote on their sales literature, if nothing else.

Are massive enterprise drives really a good idea, though? It puts a lot of capacity on a single spindle behind a single I/O port, which can be a bit like trying to suck an ocean through a straw.

Quizzed on this, Hitachi GST's VP of marketing, Ian Vogelesang, acknowledges that the 300GB drives will do best in read-mostly applications where the access density is low. He adds that it is up to HDS & co. to transparently stripe data across multiple spindles to take advantage of the available capacity without sacrificing performance.

"On high-end subsystems you could have 1000 disks, and most are still high capacity drives, with a proportion of high performance," he says.

A natural home for Serial-ATA, then? He argues otherwise, and that it is not just a case of protecting Hitachi's higher profit margins on the enterprise kit.

"There isn't much history for ATA in the enterprise, or for what happens to those drives when you pound them 24x7," he says. "So try them out first in low-usage applications."

Smaller disk, faster mechanics

Hitachi is also lining up with Seagate on the benefits of 2.5 inch small form factor (SFF) drives for blade servers and the like, but it is going straight to 3GB/sec Serial Attach SCSI (SAS), whereas Seagate plans Ultra320 and Fibre versions too for its

He expects desktop PCs to adopt SFF as well, for much the same reasons. "We can provide 40GB on one platter with one head in 3.5 inch, or one platter two heads in 2.5 inch, he says. "Everyone has to get into 2.5 inch or die."

Hitachi will demo SFF drives at next month's SAS Plugfest in New Hampshire. Don't expect to see them on sale until the end of the year though.

Of course, Hitachi GST is the result of last year's merger of the hard disk operations of IBM and Hitachi. Vogelesang says that although the price Hitachi paid for the IBM operations was criticised at the time, it is now second only to Seagate in revenue and profitability and has a wider product range, from 1 inch to 3.5 inch.

One reason for the profitability is that the combined operation finally gets past the break-even point on manufacturing versus R&D cost, but it comes from closures too. Hitachi shut down IBM European storage plants and now does all its volume manufacturing in Asia.

Vogelesang adds that more of the storage industry will move to Asia as more hard drives sell into consumer devices, from digital video recorders and camcorders through portable DVD players to cars.

"The explosive growth [for hard disks] is in consumer electronics, and most of that is portable," he says, offering the example of a mini MP3 player with a 1 inch Hitachi Microdrive in it, or a camcorder with a removable 1.8 inch drive that has ten times the capacity of a DVD.

"Hitachi has the advantage of being a Japanese company. Sony and the other consumer electronics companies have their R&D in Japan too, so their engineers can talk to ours. We also have our own consumer division and design-in experience, so we can offer them design-in services."

-------------------------------------------

from here

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/63/35829.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 72GB model uses two platters, no better than the last generation.

Yes, but with 3 heads instead of 4... The higher densities will increase sequential transfer rates, hopefully not at the expense of access times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hitachi's existing line of 147GB SCSI disks has also 5 platters. For the new 300GB model, they doubled the areal density. There is only one response for this disk in the reliability survey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why no SAS interface?

Why the bizzare 60GB platters for multiples of 36GB drive size? The 72GB model uses two platters, no better than the last generation.

In that case it'd use a smaller area of the platters, thus delivering shorter access times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Olaf van der Spek,

Isn't 5 platters asking for troubles?

Most drives use 2 or 3 platters max ATM.

Traditionally, SCSI product lines have never topped out at 2 or 3 platters.

4 platters has been standard for the past two years or so, and in the past there were many SCSI drive lines whose flagship drives boasted 5 or more platters.

10 Platters were once standard!

Remember the venerable Atlas 10K II? Back then flagship drives used a 10 platter configuration! Here's the datasheet. Earlier 10K drives had to resort to large numbers of platters to be capacity competitive and so SCSI drives have a tradition of platter counts that greatly exceed 2 or 3.

Secondarily,

I do not believe reliability is at all affected by platter counts. There were inordinate numbers of complaints from all capacities in the 75GXP line. If platter counts were a problem it probably only would have been 75GB owners complaining.

Do well.

Jonathan Guilbault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a fairly standard press release. I do wonder about platter sizes as well as actual performance, though, esp. given the underwhelming performance of the latest Hitachi SCSI units... particularly given how much heat and noise they put out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jwb,

Hitachi's existing line of 147GB SCSI disks has also 5 platters.

Incorrect.

It uses 4-platters as do all 10K SCSI drives of its generation. This information is easily found on their website.

Do well.

Jonathan Guilbault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tsk tsk.. confusing our asian companies with eachother? hehe... I'vs made the same mistake with hitachi and fujitsu before..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hitachi's existing line of 147GB SCSI disks has also 5 platters.  For the new 300GB model, they doubled the areal density.  There is only one response for this disk in the reliability survey.

Actually the current 10K line has 2/3/6 platters, a common configuration in the last few years. My Cheetahs are the same and are reliable too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Cheetah 10k2 has 5 platters, total capacity of 18.4GB. Very reliable but the platters aren't what might count, might be the programations and tweaking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this