Re: [GENERAL] pgcon2015, what happened to SMR disk technolgy ? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Geoff Winkless
Subject Re: [GENERAL] pgcon2015, what happened to SMR disk technolgy ?
Date
Msg-id CAEzk6feX=KpxWWrb-HfxqidEso1YWKJkzNNOza7Ce6wyw0YDEw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [GENERAL] pgcon2015, what happened to SMR disk technolgy ?  (Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] pgcon2015, what happened to SMR disk technolgy ?  (Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On 17 October 2017 at 11:59, Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> wrote:
What's the point of the seagate archive now ?
Ironwolf, for the same public price, have better performance (obviously) and, more surprising, a better MTBF.
 
​I have no real insight into whether Seagate are still pursuing the product design, but I'm not really surprised that the MTBF is worse: if the shingled disk must write some tracks twice for each individual track write, it seems logical that there will be more write stress and therefore shortened lifespan, no?

Geoff

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Laurent Laborde
Date:
Subject: [GENERAL] pgcon2015, what happened to SMR disk technolgy ?
Next
From: david.turon@linuxbox.cz
Date:
Subject: [GENERAL] COPY log row count feauture request