Why can't they make a 2-speed hard drive?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Johnny Hageyama
  • Start date Start date
Folkert said:
What extra speed?
Lower rpm drives usually have higher density platters to compensate.

<edited, for brevity>

Hello, Folkert:

Oh, so, you're implying that 7200RPM hard disks boast no performance
edge over 5400RPM ones?

And you used to call the "late," lamented Dr Arm® "clueless?" <G>


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>
 
John Turco said:
<edited, for brevity>

Hello, Folkert:

Oh, so, you're implying that 7200RPM hard disks boast no performance
edge over 5400RPM ones?

Am I? What exactly makes you think that?
Did that Rod Speed alias fool you into thinking I said something stupid,
Turcowitz? You'd better check your sources and learn to read.
And you used to call the "late," lamented Dr Arm® "clueless?" <G>

He's dead, is he? Massive attack of madness killed him, was it?
And now you're thinking of succeeding him, are you? Excellent choice.
 
Folkert said:
Am I? What exactly makes you think that?
Did that Rod Speed alias fool you into thinking I said something stupid,
Turcowitz? You'd better check your sources and learn to read.

Hello, Folkert:

"Turcowitz?" Is that a Polish joke, perhaps?

Regardless, my response had nothing to do with Rod Speed's reply to your
earlier article (and yes, indeed, I saw through his "alias," also). It's
just that you failed to elaborate on your statement concerning "higher
density platters," and I was simply seeking further enlightenment.
He's dead, is he? Massive attack of madness killed him, was it?
And now you're thinking of succeeding him, are you? Excellent choice.

Figuratively, yes, he does seem to be "deceased." A Google Groups
<http://groups.google.com> search (on his Dr Arm "handle") reveals no
Usenet posts from him, later than "Aug 29, 2002."

That was somewhat after he went berserk and flooded this newsgroup
with mindless messages, aimed at certain regulars (yourself included).
"Mark M" (among others) tried to have him kicked off his ISP, and
got the job done, apparently.

Anyhow, you're well aware of all this, obviously; I'm merely giving
<novices a "history lesson," so
to speak.

Now, lighten up, Dutch! The "<G>" (above) means I was only kidding...or
doesn't that translate into your language? :-J


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>
 
Arno said:
Some people cannot distinguish between latency and troughput.
Happens all the time and marks the amateur.

Arno


Hello, Arno:

Watch out, with those subtle jabs of yours, or you may get Folkert's
"Irish" up! :-P


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>
 
With the newer fluid-bearings the problem becomes more severe.
They are also designed for a specific speed and do not work
as well at other speeds.

Really? What's the physics behind this?
 
John Turco said:
Hello, Arno:

Watch out, with those subtle jabs of yours, or you may get Folkert's
"Irish" up! :-P

He was actually referring to you and Papa, Turcowitz.

And what marks an Amateur is saying 'latency' when one means 'access time'.

Not that that suddenly makes sense to what he said, unless he meant to
say that 'throughput' AND 'access time' together define performance.
 
John Turco said:
Hello, Folkert:

"Turcowitz?" Is that a Polish joke, perhaps?

Close. Witz is german for joke.
Regardless, my response had nothing to do with Rod Speed's reply to your
earlier article (and yes, indeed, I saw through his "alias," also). It's
just that you failed to elaborate on your statement concerning "higher
density platters,"

What is there to elaborate? It's common knowledge that higher
transferrates at same RPM are achieved through higher densities.
So higher density platters on 5k4 close the speed gap to 7k2.
What is so difficult to understand about that?
and I was simply seeking further enlightenment.

No you didn't. You were making a statement.
See?!


Figuratively, yes, he does seem to be "deceased." A Google Groups
<http://groups.google.com> search (on his Dr Arm "handle") reveals no
Usenet posts from him, later than "Aug 29, 2002."

That was somewhat after he went berserk and flooded this newsgroup
with mindless messages, aimed at certain regulars (yourself included).
"Mark M" (among others) tried to have him kicked off his ISP, and
got the job done, apparently.

Gestures of grandeur.
Anyhow, you're well aware of all this, obviously; I'm merely giving
<novices a "history lesson,"
so to speak.

Now, lighten up, Dutch! The "<G>" (above) means I was only kidding...

Yeah, right.
 
As Arno pointed out, 5400 rpm drives are still made and available, even if
your vendor does not carry them. Get model numbers and shop around for a
vendor that will order them for you. Maxtor has dedicated a product line
to near-line storage.

What's more, they are in big demand, because almost all of the major
storage vendors are now offering ATA RAID arrays as lowest cost per MB for
"near line" storage solutions. On top of this, the software to make near
line storage easy to use is now cheaper to get, ie shadow copy in Server
2003. Previously, even if you could afford the hardware, the software to
manage it cost even more unless you developed a system for yourself.

Why do they use 5400 rpm drives? So far, the lower RPM drives achieve
greater density, data has to be spread out more on a faster RPM drive. So
the biggest capacity (lowest cost per mb) drives are still the slower ones.
Also heat definately is a factor in any RAID array or data center. It's
also possible they have lower error rates.

Lots of people would have never believed we'd see ATA arrays side by side
with EMC SCSI disk cabinets in our data centers but that day has come.
 
Back
Top