<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Storage Architect &#187; density</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thestoragearchitect.com/tag/density/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thestoragearchitect.com</link>
	<description>Storage, Virtualisation &#38; Cloud</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 10:08:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>New Seagate Savvio Drives</title>
		<link>http://thestoragearchitect.com/2008/11/05/new-seagate-savvio-drives/</link>
		<comments>http://thestoragearchitect.com/2008/11/05/new-seagate-savvio-drives/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chris M Evans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[15K]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[density]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fujitsu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Savvio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seagate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thestoragearchitect.wordpress.com/2008/11/05/new-seagate-savvio-drives/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a rel="nofollow" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b1B7GuxiR0o/SRGGeQWBTZI/AAAAAAAAAG4/DX_GzyY0V30/s1600-h/logo_inner.gif" ></a> Seagate have <a href="http://media.seagate.com/2008/11/seagate%c2%ae-introduces-worlds-fastest-greenest-enterprise-hard-drive/" >announced</a> the availability of the next generation of Savvio 2.5&#8243; drives running at 15K. Capacity is increased to 146GB (I&#8217;m waiting for confirmation this is the case as there are no data sheets online yet). <p> <p> The capacity increase is overdue to keep up with the [...]<!--Begin ClixTrac.com Rotator Code -->
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.clixtrac.com/rotate/321"></script>
<!--End ClixTrac.com Rotator Code -->]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><a rel="nofollow" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b1B7GuxiR0o/SRGGeQWBTZI/AAAAAAAAAG4/DX_GzyY0V30/s1600-h/logo_inner.gif" ><img style="float:left;width:132px;cursor:hand;height:45px;margin:0 10px 10px 0;" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b1B7GuxiR0o/SRGGeQWBTZI/AAAAAAAAAG4/DX_GzyY0V30/s320/logo_inner.gif" border="0" /></a>
<div>Seagate have <a href="http://media.seagate.com/2008/11/seagate%c2%ae-introduces-worlds-fastest-greenest-enterprise-hard-drive/" >announced</a> the availability of the next generation of Savvio 2.5&#8243; drives running at 15K. Capacity is increased to 146GB (I&#8217;m waiting for confirmation this is the case as there are no data sheets online yet).</div>
<p>
<div></div>
<p>
<div>The capacity increase is overdue to keep up with the roadmap of 3.5&#8243; drives and co-incidentally I&#8217;m in the process of reviewing the existing Savvio model at the moment, more on this next week. </div>
<p>
<div></div>
<p>
<div>Meantime, last December I <a rel="nofollow" href="http://storagearchitect.blogspot.com/2007/12/25-enterprise-arrays.html" >posted</a> on the subject of 2.5&#8243; drives in Enterprise arrays and created <a href="http://www.storagewiki.com/attachments/DriveSizeComparisonChart.xls" >this</a> spreadsheet comparing different models. The reason for creating the sheet was to see if the physical density of 2.5&#8243; drives would exceed that of traditional 3.5&#8243; models. At the time, the best 2.5&#8243; drive offered 0.702GB/cm3 compared to a slightly better 0.796GB/cm3<a rel="nofollow" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b1B7GuxiR0o/SRGWZDSmSpI/AAAAAAAAAHA/x0lZ4pgvipM/s1600-h/Seagate+Drive+Comparison.jpg" ><img style="float:right;width:320px;cursor:hand;height:210px;margin:0 0 10px 10px;" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b1B7GuxiR0o/SRGWZDSmSpI/AAAAAAAAAHA/x0lZ4pgvipM/s320/Seagate+Drive+Comparison.jpg" border="0" /></a> for the 3.5&#8243; equivalent (73GB versus 300GB drives respectively). </div>
<p>
<div></div>
<p>
<div>With the release of 450GB 15K drives, the 3.5&#8243; pushed the lead further to 1.194GB/cm3. The latest Savvio has grabbed that lead back with 1.404GB/cm3!</div>
<p>
<div></div>
<p>
<div>OK, so the maths is not perfect and I&#8217;m talking about fractional differences which could be absorbed by the connectivity and interface attachments needed to hot plug these devices into arrays, but consider this; each 450GB 3.5&#8243; drive can be replaced by three 146GB 2.5&#8243; equivalents, giving 3 times as much parallel I/O capability. In storage arrays this is bound to have a benefit on throughput.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Now as to why 2.5&#8243; adoption hasn&#8217;t occurred so far, word on the street is that it hasn&#8217;t occurred due to the lack of multiple vendor streams.  For the record,  could only find Fujitsu and Seagate doing 2.5&#8243; 15K drives today.</div>
</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">
<p>_uacct = &#8220;UA-1104321-2&#8243;;<br />
urchinTracker();
</p></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://thestoragearchitect.com/2008/11/05/new-seagate-savvio-drives/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

