Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Data Storage Technology

400 TB Storage Drives In Our Future: Fujifilm (anandtech.com) 51

Posted by BeauHD from the what-to-expect dept.
One of the two leading manufacturers of tape cartridge storage, FujiFilm, claims that they have a technology roadmap through to 2030 which builds on the current magnetic tape paradigm to enable 400 TB per tape. AnandTech reports: As reported by Chris Mellor of Blocks and Files, Fujifilm points to using Strontium Ferrite grains in order to enable an areal data density on tape of 224 Gbit-per-square-inch, which would enable 400 TB drives. IBM and Sony have already demonstrated 201 Gbit-per-square-inch technology in 2017, with a potential release of the technology for high volume production in 2026. Current drives are over an order of magnitude smaller, at 8 Gbit-per-square-inch, however the delay between research and mass production is quite significant.

Strontium Ferrite would replace Barium Ferrite in current LTO cartridges. Strontium sits on a row above Barium in the periodic table, indicating a much smaller atom. This enables for much smaller particles to be placed into tracks, and thankfully according to Fujifilm, Strontium Ferrite exhibits properties along the same lines as Barium Ferrite, but moreso, enabling higher performance while simultaneously increasing particle density. [...] Fujifilm states that 400 TB is the limit of Strontium Ferrite, indicating that new materials would be needed to go beyond. That said, we are talking about only 224 Gbit-per-square-inch for storage, which compared to mechanical hard disks going beyhind 1000 Gbit-per-square-inch today, there would appear to be plenty of room at the top if the technologies could converge.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

400 TB Storage Drives In Our Future: Fujifilm More

400 TB Storage Drives In Our Future: Fujifilm

Comments Filter:
  • Great - how many optical discs to back that one up?
    • You want to use optical dvds to backup tapes?  Something is wrong there, seriously.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Whatever it is, it's not nearly as wrong as your font choice.

    • 85,107 DVDs.

      You might want to consider investing in a Blu-ray recorder.

      • > Blu-ray

        That'd still be a pile of disks I don't think I'd want to fall off the top of..

        I guess I'd need 3 of those 400 TB beasts - wonder how long it takes to transfer from one to another?
  • I haven't touched backups for some while. The last time I handled Veritas was probably 10 years ago and at that time an LTO 500GB tape was already blowing my mind nuts. With this type of tape, it really strength the bandwidth saying "wagon of tapes". Holly cow! I mean I'm not sure if the 500GB was in fact the largest at that time but 400TB? Damn!!!
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • BTW, that bandwidth saying was: ...a station wagon full of tapes that iconic suburban transport vehicle of the 1960s-70s the station wagon, most superbly represented by the Ford Country Squire with the fake wood panel sides. Modern day crossover SUV is kind of a station wagon, but no tailgate nor rear facing back seat for kiddos to wave at cars following behind.

  • 400 TB (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    That's 9.825 Libraries of Congress or 189.77 football fields worth of data.

  • How long is it going to take to fill one of those tapes?

    I'm feel like Ethernet is not going to cut it. Might as well have a local tape head at each workstation, with the tape running alongside the twisted pair to the storage bunker. Heck, we could replace the LAN with a tape loop altogether -- if a machine crashes, the backup is right there.

    Latency might be a slight problem for FPS games and commenting on a TikTok video before it finishes, but it might give way to a healthier online culture.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      How long is it going to take to fill one of those tapes?

      Current LTO-8 tapes hold 12 TB uncompressed and transfer at 360 MB/sec, taking about 9 hours to write all 12 TB in one go.

      For comparison LTO-7 holds 6 TB but took about 5.5 hours.
      The write speeds were fairly close, but with twice the capacity in LTO-8, it still took less than twice as long, so it isn't a linear change in time.

      But these types of drives are used under different presumptions than normal disk based storage.
      Backups are made in different tiers using different media appropriate for each tier.

      Our s

    • The customers with latest LTO drives likely will have 40 gigabit ethernet and be using fiber channel interface, that's not for home consumer market. We had them at work until three years ago but now back up to disk arrays at remote locations. And no, it's not like your home internet service either 8D

    • Re: Transfer speeds (Score:5, Informative)

      by mlheur ( 212082 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2020 @08:44PM (#60248934)

      Storage arrays can deliver 350GB/s
      https://www.dellemc.com/resour... [dellemc.com]

      SAS 4 does 22Gbps
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      So the drive connector will be the bottleneck. 32gbps FC is the wise choice.

      400TB at 32Gbps takes 26 hours.
      http://www.calctool.org/CALC/p... [calctool.org]

      The use case is for long term archive of tertiary copies for regulatory purposes. Or to tape out your cloud data. Never under estimate the throughput of a cube van full of LTO cartridges on their way to Iron Mountain.

  • Not falling for the 'tape backup' meme again.
    Back in the 90's I had tape drives. They'd inevitably wear out or stop working, then you go get another one, and find out that it won't read the tapes you laboriously backed up important stuff onto. Hundreds and hundreds of dollars invested in junk that ended up in the dumpster. Nope, not again.

    • Standards (Score:5, Informative)

      by DrYak ( 748999 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2020 @08:03PM (#60248838) Homepage

      then you go get another one, and find out that it won't read the tapes you laboriously backed up important stuff onto. Hundreds and hundreds of dollars invested in junk that ended up in the dumpster.

      That's the whole raison d'être of the LTO standard [wikipedia.org].
      People got fed up with the 90s' proprietary crap, and started using standards in the 00s.
      You can buy any drive from any manufacturer and it could read the tape of any other manufacturer, as long as they follow the LTO standard (as opposed to propreitary format like DLT).

      Not only that but the compatibility of the generations of hardware is also specified:
      - a drive can also also write on last gen's tape in their native format: this year's upcoming LTO-9 drive will be guaranteed by the standard to be able to write on LTO-8 tape
      - a drive can read two generations back LTO-7 drives could read as far back as LOT-5 drives
      (The only excetion: LTO-8 cannot read LTO-6)

      Had you been using tape nowadays, you wouldn't have had the "new drive doesn't read the previous backup" situation.

      • For most people LTO always was too pricey for home use though.

        • For most people LTO always was too pricey for home use

          For home use and even small offices, spinning rust HDD are already good enough:
          - They have higher cost per unit but don't necessitate any specilliazed hardware to access.
          You can simply buy any NAS box (Synology, Drobo, QNAP, etc.) and put HDD in there (or even build your own for shit and giggles using a SBC).
          Use snapshots to get history roll-back (profided by either BTRFS, ZFS or LVM's snapshots depending on vendor).
          Use the easy-to-swap caddies to rotate through off-site- / cold- storage (e.g.: for ransomwa

      • Had you been using tape nowadays, you wouldn't have had the "new drive doesn't read the previous backup" situation.

        He may have meant the tapes had become unreadable.

        I too have struck this problem. We don't use tapes at all in our backup system anymore, not because of tapes failing, but because they're too slow, and a giant pain in the arse.

      • You misunderstand: I'd buy a 'compatible' tape drive, and it wouldn't read the tapes I'd made with another drive. Totally useless. Never, ever again.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by sjames ( 1099 )

          That's because the compatibility was assured only by the manufacturer. They're more careful with LTO because they're commonly used by enterprises who have more lawyers than the drive manufacturer has employees.

          • Doesn't matter. Hard drives are so reliable now that even if one is failing I've got plenty of time to back things up to another one before it goes bad. Hell, I've not had a HDD in a computer go bad on me for at least 15 years now, I've got one 1TB drive that's 10 years old and still going strong. The only HDDs I ever have go bad are in my DVR (TiVo), but that's because between buffering the output of two tuners simultaneously 24 hours a day, plus having to play back previous recordings, plus it's own norma

        • So you bought a 'compatible' drive, rather than a drive following standards? I think the GP understood you perfectly, you just completely missed their point.

        • That sounds like someone who was burnt by DAT. Shitty standard that was notorious for not reading tapes written on other drives even from the same manufacturer. Alternatives at the time like 8mm and DLT didn't suffer from the same problem. LTO certainly does not suffer from the same problem.

        • You misunderstand: I'd buy a 'compatible' tape drive, and it wouldn't read the tapes I'd made with another drive.

          You misunderstood what I'm trying to say: I'm *absolutely not* thinking you're an idiot who tries to put DAT in a DLC drive.
          Again this "in between quote 'compatible'" situation is what LTO was born to address.

          With QIC minicartridge and Travan, you could be being the exact same drive from the same manufacturer, but due to difference in the version of the software packaged in (Hello, different revision of Iomega's backup software!) or other invisible differences (differences of firmware? minor hardware diffe

    • AAAARRRRHHHH! You sound like the customers we had to deal with at our computer store. We would tell them to do daily backups, we would tell them to rotate thru a large group of tapes, we tell them to make monthly and year backups that they should store elsewhere, we would tell them where and what conditions the tapes needed to be stored in for long term storage. And most important and ALWAYS ALMOST NEVER done, do a verify of the tapes to insure they are good. They always skipped the handling rules, bu

  • Great. This means I'll be able to install Red Dead Redemption 3, COD Modern Warfare,5 and Destiny 4 all at the same time.

  • I have not deleted anything major since 2012. Even my daily unit testing and regression logs have not been purged, I dont know what use they are, I have not used those logs for anything useful since... forever... Every damned email, random forwards from HR, the "inspring" messages from the CEO circa 2013, The nine revisions for the sales kick-off presentations of 2016 ....

    I was worried I may have to actually delete some files by 2022, but now I can rest easy, that 400 TB drive is just what the doctor orde

    • I can fit almost everything I think is worth keeping on 650MB disc. I have way more data in things I've collected, but stuff that I really have any emotional investment in? Yeah, I could do with a lot less.

  • The NSA will be pleased.

  • I distinctly recall all the articles.

    We'll see about these 400TB tapes.

  • https://www.pmddatasolutions.c... [pmddatasolutions.com] I guess some people feel the need to use their stupid metric (ha ha) any chance they get...

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close