330TB in the palm of you hand!!

[cj7s1]

Data tapes have been around for quite some time and have been developing very quickly, recently. About 4 months ago Sony and IBM announced a 330TB data tape.

 

Quote

IBM and Sony have developed a new magnetic tape system capable of storing 201 gigabits of data per square inch, for a max theoretical capacity of 330 terabytes in a single palm-sized cartridge.

 

For comparison, the world's largest hard drives—which are about twice the physical size of a Sony tape cartridge—are the 60TB Seagate SSD or 12TB HGST helium-filled HDD. The largest commercially available tapes only store 15TB. So, 330TB is quite a lot.

 

Info on these data tapes:

ars Technica article on these tapes: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/ibm-and-sony-cram-up-to-330tb-into-tiny-tape-cartridge/

engadget: https://www.engadget.com/2017/08/02/sony-ibm-330tb-data-storage-tapes/

 

Here is a photo for reference of how large this data tape is:

 

LTT could have used ~3 of these drives for their petabyte project (In the sense of raw data capacity)

[sazrocks]

2 minutes ago, cj7s1 said:

LTT could have used ~3 of these drives for their petabyte project

No. Actually accessing those videos would be extremely slow, and pretty much impossibly slow for two editors to read the same tape. Their current solution is the better solution.

[cj7s1]

37 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

No. Actually accessing those videos would be extremely slow, and pretty much impossibly slow for two editors to read the same tape. Their current solution is the better solution.

I understand that It would be impractical and nearly unusable with data tapes being used for mainly archival purposes I was just putting it into perspective as to how LTT used 100+ HDDS and just 3 data tapes could have the capacity.

[dizmo]

Cool? I guess? We already knew about these so it's kind of old news.

 

7 minutes ago, cj7s1 said:

I understand that It would be impractical and nearly unusable with data tapes being used for mainly archival purposed I was just putting it into perspective as to how LTT used 100+ HDDS and just 3 data tapes could have the capacity.

Then you should have worded it like that Otherwise of course you'll be called out for your incorrect statement.

 

[Enderman]

Key words "developed" and "theoretical".

This means it is not available for anyone to purchase and it also means it doesn't yet hold 330TB.

[AshleyAshes]

16 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

No. Actually accessing those videos would be extremely slow, and pretty much impossibly slow for two editors to read the same tape. Their current solution is the better solution.

Well, no, tape storage can't even work as 'well' as you are imagining.  If you use LTO as a comparison, you can see seek times for data in access of a MINUTE.  They are not something you just use as a 'Drive' in your operating system and they are more like a device that certian software can use to read or write data.  In short, you'd NEVER use a tape drive for 'random access' and don't imagine that they can even be used that way just 'very slowly'.  They're used to store large portions of data for cold storage or to stream large portions of data off the drive and back into a server or other storage that capable of random access.

[sazrocks]

11 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Well, no, tape storage can't even work as 'well' as you are imagining.  If you use LTO as a comparison, you can see seek times for data in access of a MINUTE.  They are not something you just use as a 'Drive' in your operating system and they are more like a device that certian software can use to read or write data.  In short, you'd NEVER use a tape drive for 'random access' and don't imagine that they can even be used that way just 'very slowly'.  They're used to store large portions of data for cold storage or to stream large portions of data off the drive and back into a server or other storage that capable of random access.

Why are you disagreeing with me?

I consider 

Quote

seek times for data in access of a MINUTE

to be

34 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

extremely slow

 

I also consider the statement

Quote

you'd NEVER use a tape drive for 'random access'

to mean literally

34 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

impossibly slow