Presentation on theme: "Disk & RAID 2012-10-05. The first HDD (1956) IBM 305 RAMAC 4 MB 50x24 disks 1200 rpm 100 ms access 35k$/y rent Included computer & accounting software."— Presentation transcript:
Disk & RAID
The first HDD (1956) IBM 305 RAMAC 4 MB 50x24 disks 1200 rpm 100 ms access 35k$/y rent Included computer & accounting software (tubes not transistors)
10 years later meters
Transportation of HDD
1 inch disk drive! 2000 IBM MicroDrive: – 1.7 x 1.4 x 0.2 – 1 GB, 3600 RPM, 5 MB/s, 15 ms seek – Digital camera, PalmPC? 2006 MicroDrive – 8 GB, 50 MB/s!
The internal look of HDD (now)
Data access of HDD Access Time = Seek Time + Rotational Delay + Transfer Time
Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks (RAID): Randy Katz and David Patterson: Use many PC disks to build better storage? RAID I built on 1st SPARC, 28 disks RAID II custom HW, 144 disks Today, RAID ~$25B industry RAID students join industry and academia, started own companies (VMware, Panassas)
The RAID paper D. A. Patterson, G. Gibson, and R. H. Katz, "A case for redundant arrays of inexpensive disks (RAID)," in SIGMOD'88 Proceedings of the 1988 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, 1988, vol. 17, no. 3, pp One of the important publications in computer science. mputer_science EMC, HP, IBM, NetApp… have produced so many RAID-related storage products.
RAID introduction A RAID is a Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks. – In industry, I is for Independent – The alternative is SLED, single large expensive disk Disks are small and cheap, so its easy to put lots of disks (10s to 100s) in one box for increased storage, performance, and availability. The RAID box with a RAID controller looks just like a SLED to the computer. Data plus some redundant information is Striped across the disks in some way. How that Striping is done is key to performance and reliability----Different RAID levels 0-5, 6…
RAID0 Level 0 is non-redundant disk array Files are Striped across disks, no redundant info High read throughput Best write throughput (no redundant info to write) Any disk failure results in data loss Reliability worse than SLED Stripe 0 Stripe 4 Stripe 3Stripe 1Stripe 2 Stripe 8 Stripe 10 Stripe 11 Stripe 7 Stripe 6Stripe 5 Stripe 9 data disks
RAID1 Mirrored Disks, data is written to two places On failure, just use surviving disk On read, choose fastest to read Write performance is same as single drive, read performance is 2x better Expensive data disksmirror copies Stripe 0 Stripe 4 Stripe 3Stripe 1Stripe 2 Stripe 8 Stripe 10 Stripe 11 Stripe 7 Stripe 6Stripe 5 Stripe 9 Stripe 0 Stripe 4 Stripe 3Stripe 1Stripe 2 Stripe 8 Stripe 10 Stripe 11 Stripe 7 Stripe 6Stripe 5 Stripe 9
RAID4 Block-level parity with Stripes A read accesses all the data disks A write accesses all data disks plus the parity disk Heavy load on the parity disk data disks Parity disk Stripe 0Stripe 3Stripe 1Stripe 2P0-3 Stripe 4 Stripe 8 Stripe 10 Stripe 11 Stripe 7 Stripe 6Stripe 5 Stripe 9 P4-7 P8-11
RAID5 Block Interleaved Distributed Parity Like parity scheme, but distribute the parity info over all disks (as well as data over all disks) Better read performance, large write performance data and parity disks Stripe 0Stripe 3Stripe 1Stripe 2P0-3 Stripe 4 Stripe 8 P8-11 Stripe 10 P4-7Stripe 6 Stripe 5 Stripe 9 Stripe 7 Stripe 11
RAID6 Level 5 with an extra parity Can tolerate two failures What are the odds of having two concurrent failures? May outperform Level-5 on reads, slower on writes data and parity disks Stripe 0Stripe 3Stripe 1Stripe 2P0-3 Stripe 4 Stripe 8 P8-11 Q8-11 P4-7Stripe 6 Stripe 5 Stripe 9 Q4-7 Stripe 10 Q0-3 Stripe 7 Stripe 11
Comparison of RAIDs RAID Levels Capacity Storage Efficiency Availability Ran. Read Ran. Write Seq. Read Seq. Write 0S * N100%***** 1S * N/250%******* ** 4S * (N-1)(N-1) / N*************** 5S * (N-1)(N-1) / N**************** 6S * (N-2)(N-2) / N**** * ** Note: S indicates the capacity of a single disk, N indicates the number of the disks in a RAID set.
Trend & Discussion… Disk replace Tape? Flash replace Disk? RAID is dead?