IBM to build the biggest data drive ever

Shawn Knight

Posts: 12,503   +122
Staff member
IBM is in the process of building the largest data repository ever constructed, with a combined storage capacity of 120 petabytes. The facility is being developed at the company’s Almaden,…

Read the whole story
 

Greg S

Posts: 1,607   +442
Imagine how fast of a network you would need to be able to handle that much data. A few high end routers and switches aren't going to cut it for this massive storage center. I would think that you would need a really good stock of raid cards for this array, and an even larger supply of hdds.
 
G

Guest

Wow, Replacing failing drives is going to be a full time position. I wonder if they are hiring.
 

Mister_K

Posts: 1,939   +617
gwailo247 said:
Someone wanted to have the entire internet available in offline mode.
haha always handy incase alien attack us! :p or what not...

This isn't impressive IBM, go and do that with SSD's, once you get 120Petabytes worth of SSD's then come back and show off.... damned

Jokes :p
 

aspleme

Posts: 60   +3
Close... 1024*1024*120 = 125,829,120 Gigabytes... although I would be curious to find out if that is before or after formatting... or if their storage space considers the fact that drives tend to be sold reporting size based on 1000 bytes to a kilobyte, etc, not the 1024 actually measured, thus selling a drive with a higher number of gigabytes than it actually has.
If the drive sizes are actually based on 1024 for each step, we have
135,107,988,821,114,880 bytes
vs
120,000,000,000,000,000 bytes
if we say 120 petabytes on the 1000 base for each step.
On this scale, that is
15,107,988,821,114,880 bytes missing from the reported size.
or about 13.42 petabytes... missing.
 

aj_the_kidd

Posts: 555   +0
aspleme said:
Close... 1024*1024*120 = 125,829,120 Gigabytes... although I would be curious to find out if that is before or after formatting... or if their storage space considers the fact that drives tend to be sold reporting size based on 1000 bytes to a kilobyte, etc, not the 1024 actually measured, thus selling a drive with a higher number of gigabytes than it actually has.
If the drive sizes are actually based on 1024 for each step, we have
135,107,988,821,114,880 bytes
vs
120,000,000,000,000,000 bytes
if we say 120 petabytes on the 1000 base for each step.
On this scale, that is
15,107,988,821,114,880 bytes missing from the reported size.
or about 13.42 petabytes... missing.
OK professor, anywhich way you do the math, its still a bucket load, plus "the system should not lose any data for a million years" now thats impressive. I'd be interested see how they came up with that figure
 

grvalderrama

Posts: 268   +93
aj_the_kidd said:
plus "the system should not lose any data for a million years" now thats impressive.
Why would it last a million years, when I'm almost certain that in no more than a 100 years, someone will invent a new drive that stores more data, faster, in a safer way, an so on...