[Beowulf] Re: Cooling vs HW replacement
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Robert G. Brown rgb at phy.duke.eduFri Jan 21 12:10:31 PST 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: Cooling vs HW replacement
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: Cooling vs HW replacement
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, David Mathog wrote: > > 2. higher reliability - typically 1.2-1.4M hours, and usually > > specified under higher load. this is a very fuzzy area, since > > commodity disks often quote 1Mhr under "lower" load. > > Exactly. It's very, very hard to figure out just how much reliability > one is trading for the lower price. Anecdotally, for heavy disk > usage, it's apparently a lot. Anecdotally, for low disk usuage, > ATA disks aren't all that reliable either. Has anyone observed that a megahour is 114 years? Has anyone observed that this is so ludicrous a figure as to be totally meaningless? Show me a single disk on the planet that will run, under load, for a mere two decades and I'll bow down before it and start sacrificing chickens. Humans don't live a megahour MTBF. Disks damn sure don't. rgb -- Robert G. Brown http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/ Duke University Dept. of Physics, Box 90305 Durham, N.C. 27708-0305 Phone: 1-919-660-2567 Fax: 919-660-2525 email:rgb at phy.duke.edu
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: Cooling vs HW replacement
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: Cooling vs HW replacement
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
