Am Montag, 11. März 2013, 06:02:26 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> On 3/10/2013 1:54 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > So in summary, an Exabyte scale XFS is simply not practical today, and
> > won't be for at least another couple of decades, or more, if ever. The
> > same holds true for some of the other filesystems you're going to be
> > writing about. Some of the cluster and/or distributed filesystems
> > you're looking at could probably scale to Exabytes today. That is, if
> > someone had the budget for half a million hard drives, host systems,
> > switches, etc, the facilities to house it all, and the budget for power
> > and cooling. That's 834 racks for drives alone, just under 1/3rd of a
> > mile long if installed in a single row.
> Jet lag due to time travel caused a math error above. With today's 4TB
> drives it would require 2.25 million units for a raw 9EB capacity.
> That's 3,750 racks of 600 drives each. These would stretch 1.42 miles,
> 7500 ft.
And I just acknowledged the building plans for our new datacenter, based on
your former calculations. The question is, who carries the costs of the now
needed 4 other floors of that building..
Are you well-insured, Stan?