Hard disk test 'surprises' Google

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eric Gisin
  • Start date Start date
Eric Gisin said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6376021.stm
http://labs.google.com/papers/disk_failures.pdf

"The impact of heavy use and high temperatures on hard disk drive
failure may be overstated, says a report by three Google engineers.
The report examined 100,000 commercial hard drives,
ranging from 80GB to 400GB in capacity, used at Google since 2001.
Click to expand...

The pdf also makes it clear that thats an unusual result that is very
different to the other analyses it cited found. It isnt clear why there
is that dramatic difference with the google result being unique.
 
Eric Gisin said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6376021.stm
http://labs.google.com/papers/disk_failures.pdf

"The impact of heavy use and high temperatures on hard disk drive
failure may be overstated, says a report by three Google engineers.
The report examined 100,000 commercial hard drives,
ranging from 80GB to 400GB in capacity, used at Google since 2001.
Click to expand...
The firm uses "off-the-shelf" drives
Click to expand...

So they don't manufacture their own harddrives. What a disgrace.
to store cached web pages and services.
Click to expand...

So what do they use for their database then.
..."
Click to expand...

Btw, I found this far more interesting:

Q
We find that the group of drives with scan errors are 10 times more
likely to fail than the group with no errors," said the authors.

They added:
"After the first scan error, drives are 39 times more likely to fail
within 60 days than drives without scan errors."
EQ

Not that it actually means anything, but as far as sound
bites go it sounds very technical and worrying, doesn't it.
 
Back
Top