Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 24 Mar 2015 17:05:45 +0000
From:      Dale Kline <DKline@safarimontage.com>
To:        'Tom Evans' <tevans.uk@googlemail.com>, Shehbaz Jaffer <shehbazjaffer007@gmail.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD FS <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>, "freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: Zoned Commands ZBC/ZAC, Shingled SMR drives, ZFS
Message-ID:  <02F3A553C174554DA1D5EC7CEE9BDDD7011BC3E42B@loki.lvc.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFHbX1KLSuES8rJ1Nzho7g8kj-mD_vRAuCyYvdEK9xpz49QBZA@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAD2Ti2_kQhnDL9nvdCT-zMG1bPeLSqTHemn%2B9hueRDLotmsLmw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPLK-i9OSv4ng-6Bwqc%2Byne%2BimDx_veOkwZij=hC1jLrE_ZUJw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFHbX1KLSuES8rJ1Nzho7g8kj-mD_vRAuCyYvdEK9xpz49QBZA@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
READ THE DOCUMENTATION THOROUGHLY on these SMR drives.   There are serious =
WRITE restrictions on these drives because of the overlapping (shingled) tr=
acks.  I have read over several times and am still not sure of all of the c=
aveats.  As Tom states below,  they are to be used mainly in "WRITE ONCE,  =
READ MANY" environments.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-hardware@fre=
ebsd.org] On Behalf Of Tom Evans
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 12:39 PM
To: Shehbaz Jaffer
Cc: FreeBSD FS; grarpamp; freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Zoned Commands ZBC/ZAC, Shingled SMR drives, ZFS

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Shehbaz Jaffer <shehbazjaffer007@gmail.co=
m> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering what cost advantage do SMR drive provide as compared=20
> to normal CMR drive?
>
> 8TB SMR drive - $ 260
> 3TB CMR (Conventional Magnetic Recording drive) - $ 105
>

Purchase price is not irrelevant, but the key benefits are increased capaci=
ty per disk, and reduced power usage per disk and (multiplied by the increa=
se in capacity) per TB. In other words, they disks consume less power, you =
need fewer of them, maybe allowing you to run fewer servers.

Of course, you also need a mainly read only workload. The RAID rebuild test=
 from the linked review is *scary*. I wouldn't use these in ZFS raidz witho=
ut plenty of disaster recovery testing - how long does it take to re-silver=
 the pool when you lose a disk and what is the performance characteristics =
of the pool whilst it is doing so.

Cheers

Tom
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/=
listinfo/freebsd-hardware
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hardware-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?02F3A553C174554DA1D5EC7CEE9BDDD7011BC3E42B>