RAID0.5: Active Data Replication for Low Cost Disk Array Data Protection

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

RAID0.5: Active Data Replication for Low Cost Disk Array Data Protection RAID0.5: Active Data Replication for Low Cost Disk Array Data Protection John A. Chandy Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Connecticut Storrs, CT 06269-2157 [email protected] Abstract— RAID has long been established as an effective This overhead makes RAID cost prohibitive in many way to provide highly reliable as well as high-performance disk environments, particularly single user desktop computers subsystems. However, reliability in RAID systems comes at the and laptops. RAID5 requires the installation of either cost of extra disks. In this paper, we describe a mechanism that we have termed RAID0.5 that enables striped disks with SCSI controllers or multiple IDE controllers and enclo- very high data reliability but low disk cost. We take advantage sures to contain the multiple disks. In a two-disk scenario of the fact that most disk systems use backup systems for that is feasible for most single PCs, the 100% overhead disaster recovery. With the use of these backup systems, the disk of RAID1 mirroring becomes costly. system needs to only replicate data since the last backup, thus It is in this light that we present RAID0.5, a midway drastically reducing the storage space requirement. Though RAID0.5 has the same data loss characteristics of traditional point between RAID0 and RAID1 in that it provides mirroring, the lower storage space comes at the cost of lower equivalent data loss guarantees to RAID1 with just availability. Thus, RAID0.5 is a tradeoff between lower disk slightly more overhead than RAID0. However, as we cost and lower availability while still preserving very high will show, the tradeoff between RAID0.5 and RAID1 data reliability. We present analytical reliability models and is the lower availability of a RAID0.5 system. The experimental results that demonstrate the enhanced reliability and performance of the proposed RAID0.5 system. remainder of the paper describes the overall architecture and analysis of RAID0.5, experimental results future I. INTRODUCTION directions, and related work. Disk arrays have long been used to improve the performance of storage systems [1], [2]. The parallelism II. RAID0.5 inherent in multi-disk systems can significantly boost The goal of the RAID0.5 architecture is to provide a both the throughput and response times as compared to a disk subsystem that can achieve high reliability with low single disk system. However, the increased performance cost. Our particular aim is to make the method feasible comes at the cost of lower reliability. As a result, for systems with relatively few disks. A typical RAID5 disk arrays need some form of redundancy to improve system will have 5-7 disks in the array, leading to a reliability. The most common and cost effective solution redundancy overhead of 14-20%. As you use fewer disks to improve the reliability of disk systems is the use of and approach RAID1 mirroring, the overhead quickly Redundant Array of Inexpensive (or Independent) Disks approaches 100%. With a RAID0.5 system, we would (RAID) [3]. The various levels of RAID specify different like to maintain a redundancy overhead of less than 20% methods of redundancy to provide reliability. The most for even 2 disk systems. In a two-disk system, in order commonly used forms of RAID are RAID1 or mirroring, to prevent data loss, it would seem that we would need which entails replication of the data on multiple disks, to replicate all the data on a disk thus leading to 100% and RAID5 or parity striping, which involves spreading overhead. Compressing the replicated data may allow data along with parity across multiple disks. Choosing for smaller overheads, but this is not guaranteed and the which RAID level to use is typically determined by cost compression process can be compute intensive. and application requirements. At the disk array level, The key to achieving low redundancy overheads is the redundancy choice is usually RAID5 as it provides to replicate only a portion of the data on a disk. If excellent availability, moderate storage overhead, and we assume that the system is being periodically backed adequate performance. up, then we need only to replicate data that has been All RAID levels require extra disks to provide redun- changed since the last backup. We define this data as dancy. In the case of RAID5, the redundancy overhead the active data. In such a scenario, if a disk fails, active is 1/D where D is the number of data disks in a data can be recovered from the remaining disk(s) and redundancy group. With RAID1, the overhead is 100%. inactive data can be recovered from the backup media. The backup window determines how much data needs to Disk 0 Disk 1 Disk 2 Disk 3 be replicated. For example, a weekly backup will create a D00 D01 D02 D03 larger active data set size than a daily backup. HP’s study D10 D11 D12 D13 of working set sizes showed that, on average, only 2% of Data Region the storage space is written to over a 24 hour period [4]. ... ... ... ... } The largest observed 24-hour write set size was just over Dn0 Dn1 Dn2 Dn3 10%. Thus, assuming daily backups, we need to only Replication replicate 10% of the data in the array. Assuming similar } Region access patterns over a week, the weekly working set size a) Initial Data Distribution should not change much, so a 15% replication overhead may be sufficient for weekly backups. Disk 0 Disk 1 Disk 2 Disk 3 The data distribution of a RAID0.5 system is shown D00 D01 D02 D03' for a 4 disk system in Figure 1. Each row in the disk D10' D11 D12 D13 represents one of n stripes as in a RAID0 disk array, Data and each cell represents a data block or chunk of a ... ... ... ... }Region stripe on a disk. On each disk, we dedicate a region Dn0 Dn1 Dn2 Dn3 for replication, the size of which is determined by the Replication D03'D10' D21' desired redundancy overhead which is determined by the } Region backup frequency as described above. In Figure 1a, the data distribution is shown for a system where the active b) Data Distribution after writes to D10, D21, and D03 data set is empty, i.e. immediately after a backup. After Fig. 1. RAID0.5 data distribution. writes to D10, D21, and D03, we can see in Figure 1b that the writes have been replicated to replication regions on adjacent disks. By replicating on the next disk (mod not require nonstop operation but do require absolute number of disks), we can ensure that the active data is data protection. Because of this high-reliability low- preserved on at least one disk in the event of a single availability characteristic, we placed RAID0.5 between disk failure. If a disk replication region fills up, we can the low-reliability, low-availability RAID0 and high- replicate the data to another disk or grow the replication reliability, high-availability RAID1. region. If this is not possible, the file system or disk In light of this distinction between system availability driver will respond as if the disk is full. and data loss protection, when doing reliability analysis III. RELIABILITY ANALYSIS we are more interested in the mean time to data loss (MTTDL) rather than the more conventional mean time When a disk fails, any requests to active data can be to failure (MTTF). The analysis is similar but MTTDL delivered from the replication region. However, requests implies nothing about system availability as MTTF does. to inactive data can not be serviced because the data is not available online and must be retrieved from backup A. RAID0.5 with replication region media. Thus, in a RAID0.5 system, as soon as failure We can develop a model for the MTTDL and availabil- is detected, the system must block all future accesses ity of a RAID0.5 system using a analysis methodology to disk until the failed disk can be reconstructed from similar to that outlined in [3]. Each disk is assumed backup. To prevent the chance of a second failure, the to have independent and exponential failure rates. We system should power down all disks in the system. Note assume d disks in the array and a replication ratio of r, that this implies that a RAID0.5 system is not available i.e. the ratio of the replication region size to data size. under failure even though there has been no data loss. Each disk is assumed to have a mean time to failure of This behavior is different from a RAID1 or RAID5 sys- MTTFDisk. The mean time to failure of one disk in the tem where data is still available even under a single disk Disk array is MTTF and data loss occurs when a second failure. Thus, for a RAID0.5 system there is a distinction d disk fails while the first failed disk is being repaired. between availability and data loss protection, whereas no such distinction exists for other RAID levels. A RAID0.5 MTTDLRAID0.5 = system trades off system availability for low redundancy MTTF 1 costs. Therefore, using RAID0.5 is not appropriate for Disk ∗ (1) data loss failure during repair mission critical applications that require 24/7 operation, d P r[ ] but it is appropriate for desktop applications that may If we define the mean time to repair the disk as MTTR , then assuming exponential failure rates, the Replication Disk Disk 0 Disk 1 Disk 2 Disk 3 Disk probability of a failure during the repair time is: D00 D01 D02 D03 − −MTTRDisk /MT T FDisk (d−1) 1 (e ) (2) D10 D11 D12 D13 Since MTTRDisk is almost always much less than D20 D21 D22 D23 MTTFDisk, the above expression can be approximated ..
Recommended publications
  • VIA RAID Configurations
    VIA RAID configurations The motherboard includes a high performance IDE RAID controller integrated in the VIA VT8237R southbridge chipset. It supports RAID 0, RAID 1 and JBOD with two independent Serial ATA channels. RAID 0 (called Data striping) optimizes two identical hard disk drives to read and write data in parallel, interleaved stacks. Two hard disks perform the same work as a single drive but at a sustained data transfer rate, double that of a single disk alone, thus improving data access and storage. Use of two new identical hard disk drives is required for this setup. RAID 1 (called Data mirroring) copies and maintains an identical image of data from one drive to a second drive. If one drive fails, the disk array management software directs all applications to the surviving drive as it contains a complete copy of the data in the other drive. This RAID configuration provides data protection and increases fault tolerance to the entire system. Use two new drives or use an existing drive and a new drive for this setup. The new drive must be of the same size or larger than the existing drive. JBOD (Spanning) stands for Just a Bunch of Disks and refers to hard disk drives that are not yet configured as a RAID set. This configuration stores the same data redundantly on multiple disks that appear as a single disk on the operating system. Spanning does not deliver any advantage over using separate disks independently and does not provide fault tolerance or other RAID performance benefits. If you use either Windows® XP or Windows® 2000 operating system (OS), copy first the RAID driver from the support CD to a floppy disk before creating RAID configurations.
    [Show full text]
  • D:\Documents and Settings\Steph
    P45D3 Platinum Series MS-7513 (v1.X) Mainboard G52-75131X1 i Copyright Notice The material in this document is the intellectual property of MICRO-STAR INTERNATIONAL. We take every care in the preparation of this document, but no guarantee is given as to the correctness of its contents. Our products are under continual improvement and we reserve the right to make changes without notice. Trademarks All trademarks are the properties of their respective owners. NVIDIA, the NVIDIA logo, DualNet, and nForce are registered trademarks or trade- marks of NVIDIA Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. AMD, Athlon™, Athlon™ XP, Thoroughbred™, and Duron™ are registered trade- marks of AMD Corporation. Intel® and Pentium® are registered trademarks of Intel Corporation. PS/2 and OS®/2 are registered trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation. Windows® 95/98/2000/NT/XP/Vista are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. Netware® is a registered trademark of Novell, Inc. Award® is a registered trademark of Phoenix Technologies Ltd. AMI® is a registered trademark of American Megatrends Inc. Revision History Revision Revision History Date V1.0 First release for PCB 1.X March 2008 (P45D3 Platinum) Technical Support If a problem arises with your system and no solution can be obtained from the user’s manual, please contact your place of purchase or local distributor. Alternatively, please try the following help resources for further guidance. Visit the MSI website for FAQ, technical guide, BIOS updates, driver updates, and other information: http://global.msi.com.tw/index.php? func=faqIndex Contact our technical staff at: http://support.msi.com.tw/ ii Safety Instructions 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Dxi4500 User's Guide
    User’s Guide User’s Guide User’s Guide User’s Guide QuantumQuantum DXDXii45004500 DX i -Series 6-66904-01 Rev C DXi4500 User’s Guide, 6-66904-01 Rev C, August 2010, Product of USA. Quantum Corporation provides this publication “as is” without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Quantum Corporation may revise this publication from time to time without notice. COPYRIGHT STATEMENT © 2010 Quantum Corporation. All rights reserved. Your right to copy this manual is limited by copyright law. Making copies or adaptations without prior written authorization of Quantum Corporation is prohibited by law and constitutes a punishable violation of the law. TRADEMARK STATEMENT Quantum, the Quantum logo, DLT, DLTtape, the DLTtape logo, Scalar, and StorNext are registered trademarks of Quantum Corporation, registered in the U.S. and other countries. Backup. Recovery. Archive. It’s What We Do., the DLT logo, DLTSage, DXi, DXi-Series, Dynamic Powerdown, FastSense, FlexLink, GoVault, MediaShield, Optyon, Pocket-sized. Well-armored, SDLT, SiteCare, SmartVerify, StorageCare, Super DLTtape, SuperLoader, and Vision are trademarks of Quantum. LTO and Ultrium are trademarks of HP, IBM, and Quantum in the U.S. and other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. Specifications are subject to change without notice. ii Quantum DXi4500 User’s Guide Contents Preface xv Chapter 1 DXi4500 System Description 1 Overview . 1 Features and Benefits . 3 Data Reduction . 3 Data Deduplication . 3 Compression. 4 Space Reclamation . 4 Remote Replication . 5 DXi4500 System .
    [Show full text]
  • Replication Using Group Communication Over a Partitioned Network
    Replication Using Group Communication Over a Partitioned Network Thesis submitted for the degree “Doctor of Philosophy” Yair Amir Submitted to the Senate of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (1995). This work was carried out under the supervision of Professor Danny Dolev ii Acknowledgments I am deeply grateful to Danny Dolev, my advisor and mentor. I thank Danny for believing in my research, for spending so many hours on it, and for giving it the theoretical touch. His warm support and patient guidance helped me through. I hope I managed to adopt some of his professional attitude and integrity. I thank Daila Malki for her help during the early stages of the Transis project. Thanks to Idit Keidar for helping me sharpen some of the issues of the replication server. I enjoyed my collaboration with Ofir Amir on developing the coloring model of the replication server. Many thanks to Roman Vitenberg for his valuable insights regarding the extended virtual synchrony model and the replication algorithm. I benefited a lot from many discussions with Ahmad Khalaila regarding distributed systems and other issues. My thanks go to David Breitgand, Gregory Chokler, Yair Gofen, Nabil Huleihel and Rimon Orni, for their contribution to the Transis project and to my research. I am grateful to Michael Melliar-Smith and Louise Moser from the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara. During two summers, several mutual visits and extensive electronic correspondence, Louise and Michael were involved in almost every aspect of my research, and unofficially served as my co-advisors. The work with Deb Agarwal and Paul Ciarfella on the Totem protocol contributed a lot to my understanding of high-speed group communication.
    [Show full text]
  • Designing Disk Arrays for High Data Reliability
    Designing Disk Arrays for High Data Reliability Garth A. Gibson School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsbugh PA 15213 David A. Patterson Computer Science Division Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences University of California at Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720 hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh This research was funded by NSF grant MIP-8715235, NASA/DARPA grant NAG 2-591, a Computer Measurement Group fellowship, and an IBM predoctoral fellowship. 1 Proposed running head: Designing Disk Arrays for High Data Reliability Please forward communication to: Garth A. Gibson School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University 5000 Forbes Ave. Pittsburgh PA 15213-3890 412-268-5890 FAX 412-681-5739 [email protected] ABSTRACT Redundancy based on a parity encoding has been proposed for insuring that disk arrays provide highly reliable data. Parity-based redundancy will tolerate many independent and dependent disk failures (shared support hardware) without on-line spare disks and many more such failures with on-line spare disks. This paper explores the design of reliable, redundant disk arrays. In the context of a 70 disk strawman array, it presents and applies analytic and simulation models for the time until data is lost. It shows how to balance requirements for high data reliability against the overhead cost of redundant data, on-line spares, and on-site repair personnel in terms of an array's architecture, its component reliabilities, and its repair policies. 2 Recent advances in computing speeds can be matched by the I/O performance afforded by parallelism in striped disk arrays [12, 13, 24]. Arrays of small disks further utilize advances in the technology of the magnetic recording industry to provide cost-effective I/O systems based on disk striping [19].
    [Show full text]
  • Disk Array Data Organizations and RAID
    Guest Lecture for 15-440 Disk Array Data Organizations and RAID October 2010, Greg Ganger © 1 Plan for today Why have multiple disks? Storage capacity, performance capacity, reliability Load distribution problem and approaches disk striping Fault tolerance replication parity-based protection “RAID” and the Disk Array Matrix Rebuild October 2010, Greg Ganger © 2 Why multi-disk systems? A single storage device may not provide enough storage capacity, performance capacity, reliability So, what is the simplest arrangement? October 2010, Greg Ganger © 3 Just a bunch of disks (JBOD) A0 B0 C0 D0 A1 B1 C1 D1 A2 B2 C2 D2 A3 B3 C3 D3 Yes, it’s a goofy name industry really does sell “JBOD enclosures” October 2010, Greg Ganger © 4 Disk Subsystem Load Balancing I/O requests are almost never evenly distributed Some data is requested more than other data Depends on the apps, usage, time, … October 2010, Greg Ganger © 5 Disk Subsystem Load Balancing I/O requests are almost never evenly distributed Some data is requested more than other data Depends on the apps, usage, time, … What is the right data-to-disk assignment policy? Common approach: Fixed data placement Your data is on disk X, period! For good reasons too: you bought it or you’re paying more … Fancy: Dynamic data placement If some of your files are accessed a lot, the admin (or even system) may separate the “hot” files across multiple disks In this scenario, entire files systems (or even files) are manually moved by the system admin to specific disks October 2010, Greg
    [Show full text]
  • Replication Vs. Caching Strategies for Distributed Metadata Management in Cloud Storage Systems
    ShardFS vs. IndexFS: Replication vs. Caching Strategies for Distributed Metadata Management in Cloud Storage Systems Lin Xiao, Kai Ren, Qing Zheng, Garth A. Gibson Carnegie Mellon University {lxiao, kair, zhengq, garth}@cs.cmu.edu Abstract 1. Introduction The rapid growth of cloud storage systems calls for fast and Modern distributed storage systems commonly use an archi- scalable namespace processing. While few commercial file tecture that decouples metadata access from file read and systems offer anything better than federating individually write operations [21, 25, 46]. In such a file system, clients non-scalable namespace servers, a recent academic file sys- acquire permission and file location information from meta- tem, IndexFS, demonstrates scalable namespace processing data servers before accessing file contents, so slower meta- based on client caching of directory entries and permissions data service can degrade performance for the data path. Pop- (directory lookup state) with no per-client state in servers. In ular new distributed file systems such as HDFS [25] and the this paper we explore explicit replication of directory lookup first generation of the Google file system [21] have used cen- state in all servers as an alternative to caching this infor- tralized single-node metadata services and focused on scal- mation in all clients. Both eliminate most repeated RPCs to ing only the data path. However, the single-node metadata different servers in order to resolve hierarchical permission server design limits the scalability of the file system in terms tests. Our realization for server replicated directory lookup of the number of objects stored and concurrent accesses to state, ShardFS, employs a novel file system specific hybrid the file system [40].
    [Show full text]
  • Identify Storage Technologies and Understand RAID
    LESSON 4.1_4.2 98-365 Windows Server Administration Fundamentals IdentifyIdentify StorageStorage TechnologiesTechnologies andand UnderstandUnderstand RAIDRAID LESSON 4.1_4.2 98-365 Windows Server Administration Fundamentals Lesson Overview In this lesson, you will learn: Local storage options Network storage options Redundant Array of Independent Disk (RAID) options LESSON 4.1_4.2 98-365 Windows Server Administration Fundamentals Anticipatory Set List three different RAID configurations. Which of these three bus types has the fastest transfer speed? o Parallel ATA (PATA) o Serial ATA (SATA) o USB 2.0 LESSON 4.1_4.2 98-365 Windows Server Administration Fundamentals Local Storage Options Local storage options can range from a simple single disk to a Redundant Array of Independent Disks (RAID). Local storage options can be broken down into bus types: o Serial Advanced Technology Attachment (SATA) o Integrated Drive Electronics (IDE, now called Parallel ATA or PATA) o Small Computer System Interface (SCSI) o Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) LESSON 4.1_4.2 98-365 Windows Server Administration Fundamentals Local Storage Options SATA drives have taken the place of the tradition PATA drives. SATA have several advantages over PATA: o Reduced cable bulk and cost o Faster and more efficient data transfer o Hot-swapping technology LESSON 4.1_4.2 98-365 Windows Server Administration Fundamentals Local Storage Options (continued) SAS drives have taken the place of the traditional SCSI and Ultra SCSI drives in server class machines. SAS have several
    [Show full text]
  • Replication As a Prelude to Erasure Coding in Data-Intensive Scalable Computing
    DiskReduce: Replication as a Prelude to Erasure Coding in Data-Intensive Scalable Computing Bin Fan Wittawat Tantisiriroj Lin Xiao Garth Gibson fbinfan , wtantisi , lxiao , garth.gibsong @ cs.cmu.edu CMU-PDL-11-112 October 2011 Parallel Data Laboratory Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 Acknowledgements: We would like to thank several people who made significant contributions. Robert Chansler, Raj Merchia and Hong Tang from Yahoo! provide various help. Dhruba Borthakur from Facebook provides statistics and feedback. Bin Fu and Brendan Meeder gave us their scientific applications and data-sets for experimental evaluation. The work in this paper is based on research supported in part by the Betty and Gordon Moore Foundation, by the Department of Energy, under award number DE-FC02-06ER25767, by the Los Alamos National Laboratory, by the Qatar National Research Fund, under award number NPRP 09-1116-1-172, under contract number 54515- 001-07, by the National Science Foundation under awards CCF-1019104, CCF-0964474, OCI-0852543, CNS-0546551 and SCI-0430781, and by Google and Yahoo! research awards. We also thank the members and companies of the PDL Consortium (including APC, EMC, Facebook, Google, Hewlett-Packard, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, NEC, NetApp, Oracle, Panasas, Riverbed, Samsung, Seagate, STEC, Symantec, and VMware) for their interest, insights, feedback, and support. Keywords: Distributed File System, RAID, Cloud Computing, DISC Abstract The first generation of Data-Intensive Scalable Computing file systems such as Google File System and Hadoop Distributed File System employed n (n ≥ 3) replications for high data reliability, therefore delivering users only about 1=n of the total storage capacity of the raw disks.
    [Show full text]
  • Middleware-Based Database Replication: the Gaps Between Theory and Practice
    Appears in Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Conference, Vancouver, Canada (June 2008) Middleware-based Database Replication: The Gaps Between Theory and Practice Emmanuel Cecchet George Candea Anastasia Ailamaki EPFL EPFL & Aster Data Systems EPFL & Carnegie Mellon University Lausanne, Switzerland Lausanne, Switzerland Lausanne, Switzerland [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT There exist replication “solutions” for every major DBMS, from Oracle RAC™, Streams™ and DataGuard™ to Slony-I for The need for high availability and performance in data Postgres, MySQL replication and cluster, and everything in- management systems has been fueling a long running interest in between. The naïve observer may conclude that such variety of database replication from both academia and industry. However, replication systems indicates a solved problem; the reality, academic groups often attack replication problems in isolation, however, is the exact opposite. Replication still falls short of overlooking the need for completeness in their solutions, while customer expectations, which explains the continued interest in developing new approaches, resulting in a dazzling variety of commercial teams take a holistic approach that often misses offerings. opportunities for fundamental innovation. This has created over time a gap between academic research and industrial practice. Even the “simple” cases are challenging at large scale. We deployed a replication system for a large travel ticket brokering This paper aims to characterize the gap along three axes: system at a Fortune-500 company faced with a workload where performance, availability, and administration. We build on our 95% of transactions were read-only. Still, the 5% write workload own experience developing and deploying replication systems in resulted in thousands of update requests per second, which commercial and academic settings, as well as on a large body of implied that a system using 2-phase-commit, or any other form of prior related work.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 O--C/?__I RAID-II: Design and Implementation Of
    f r : NASA-CR-192911 I I /N --6 o--c/?__i _ /f( RAID-II: Design and Implementation of a/t 't Large Scale Disk Array Controller R.H. Katz, P.M. Chen, A.L. Drapeau, E.K. Lee, K. Lutz, E.L. Miller, S. Seshan, D.A. Patterson r u i (NASA-CR-192911) RAID-Z: DESIGN N93-25233 AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A LARGE SCALE u DISK ARRAY CONTROLLER (California i Univ.) 18 p Unclas J II ! G3160 0158657 ! I i I \ i O"-_ Y'O J i!i111 ,= -, • • ,°. °.° o.o I I Report No. UCB/CSD-92-705 "-----! I October 1992 _,'_-_,_ i i I , " Computer Science Division (EECS) University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California 94720 RAID-II: Design and Implementation of a Large Scale Disk Array Controller 1 R. H. Katz P. M. Chen, A. L Drapeau, E. K. Lee, K. Lutz, E. L Miller, S. Seshan, D. A. Patterson Computer Science Division Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720 Abstract: We describe the implementation of a large scale disk array controller and subsystem incorporating over 100 high performance 3.5" disk chives. It is designed to provide 40 MB/s sustained performance and 40 GB capacity in three 19" racks. The array controller forms an integral part of a file server that attaches to a Gb/s local area network. The controller implements a high bandwidth interconnect between an interleaved memory, an XOR calculation engine, the network interface (HIPPI), and the disk interfaces (SCSI). The system is now functionally operational, and we are tuning its performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Manufacturing Equipment Technologies for Hard Disk's
    Manufacturing Equipment Technologies for Hard Disk’s Challenge of Physical Limits 222 Manufacturing Equipment Technologies for Hard Disk’s Challenge of Physical Limits Kyoichi Mori OVERVIEW: To meet the world’s growing demands for volume information, Brian Rattray not just with computers but digitalization and video etc. the HDD must Yuichi Matsui, Dr. Eng. continually increase its capacity and meet expectations for reduced power consumption and green IT. Up until now the HDD has undergone many innovative technological developments to achieve higher recording densities. To continue this increase, innovative new technology is again required and is currently being developed at a brisk pace. The key components for areal density improvements, the disk and head, require high levels of performance and reliability from production and inspection equipment for efficient manufacturing and stable quality assurance. To meet this demand, high frequency electronics, servo positioning and optical inspection technology is being developed and equipment provided. Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation is doing its part to meet market needs for increased production and the adoption of next-generation technology by developing the technology and providing disk and head manufacturing/inspection equipment (see Fig. 1). INTRODUCTION higher efficiency storage, namely higher density HDDS (hard disk drives) have long relied on the HDDs will play a major role. computer market for growth but in recent years To increase density, the performance and quality of there has been a shift towards cloud computing and the HDD’s key components, disks (media) and heads consumer electronics etc. along with a rapid expansion have most effect. Therefore further technological of data storage applications (see Fig.
    [Show full text]