Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

IBM Introduces Petabyte-Capacity 'Storage Tank'

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the just-squash-it-in-there dept.

208

statikuz writes "Wired is reporting that IBM's new data storage system, codenamed "Storage Tank", uses software to link servers in multiple locations over an IP network, creating a sort of mega-server capable of connecting thousands of computers and processing multiple petabytes of data. 'Storage Tank has the potential to become to an organization's data what the Dewey Decimal system is to a library,' said Dan Colby, general manager of storage systems at IBM. 'It reinvents the way information is filed, managed, shared and accessed within an organization.' CERN is currently using a beta version of the system to store data from the Large Hadron Collider particle accelerator, which is being used to recreate the first moments of the Big Bang. IBM expects Storage Tank eventually will be able to handle 10 to 20 terabytes of CERN data. Get your own 'starter configuration' for only $90,000!"

cancel ×

208 comments

This is exactly what I need! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204926)

For my house, of course.

Re:This is exactly what I need! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205363)

A storage tank for all of my feces!

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Jamal von Bismarck (713691) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204928)

Merepresents suckahz !

Re:FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204969)

j00 f4!|_3|) !T

Whats next in this path? (-1, Offtopic)

bossesjoe (675859) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204934)

One step closer to the goal of DRM I guess

Re:Whats next in this path? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204965)

Dude, what the fuck does this have to do with DRM?

MOD PARENT DOWN (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204996)

bossesjoe is a known troll who's been plaguing /. for months with useless gibberish. Let's get rid of him once and for all.

Re:MOD PARENT DOWN (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205039)

Yes, because down-moderating has done such a bang-up job of ridding Slashdot of trolls thus far.

MOD PARENT DOWN ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205085)

Anonymous Coward is a known troll who's been plaguing /. for months with useless gibberish. Let's get rid of him once and for all.

Dewey decimal? (4, Insightful)

chennes (263526) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204945)

Quote:
"Storage Tank has the potential to become to an organization's data what the Dewey Decimal system is to a library"

Strange that he compares it to a system that few libraries use anymore. Yes, it revolutionized cataloguing. Right before it became obsolete (because it cost too much).

Not too long ago Slashdot reported [slashdot.org] on the owners of the Dewey Decimal system suing a hotel [libraryhotel.com] in New York for using it as the theme for their room numbering. How long until IBM starts suing everyone with a storage tank [google.com] ?

Re:Dewey decimal? (1)

trippinonbsd (689462) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204973)

Yes, they had better be careful because the dewey decimal system is NOT public domain!

Re:Dewey decimal? (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205267)

Strange that he compares it to a system that few libraries use anymore. Yes, it revolutionized cataloguing. Right before it became obsolete (because it cost too much).

A lot of municipal libraries (you know, the markedly inferior, off campus establishments) in the United States use Dewey.

IEEE (1)

michaelhood (667393) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205508)

Don't IEEE numbers use the Dewey Decimal system as the theme for their specs? 802.11a, 802.3, etc.

even closer in SNMP OIDs (1)

axxackall (579006) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205610)

check OIDs in SNMP, looks precisely as a decimal-position addressing system.

At last.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204951)

When we finally manage to federate the sum of human knowledge, we'll have some where to put it.

Frist! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204954)

Intentional Mispelling

Re:Frist! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205507)

Fialure!

Terabytes or Petabytes? (1)

chennes (263526) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204970)

Quote:
"IBM expects Storage Tank eventually will be able to handle 10 to 20 terabytes of CERN data. By 2007, when the proton smashing is scheduled to commence in earnest, CERN will be generating data at a minimum rate of 5 to 8 petabytes a year."

Wow! This monster storage tank will be able to handle 20 terabytes of data! In four years?! That's just amazing!! A whole 1/1000th of the required yearly storage!

Re:Terabytes or Petabytes? (2, Insightful)

JDevers (83155) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205063)

I'm betting that SHOULD be 10 to 20 petabytes. 10 to 20 terabytes isn't actually all that much, Maxtor has 300 gigabyte drives out. A very simple array could be built that is easily 10-20 terabytes.

Re:Terabytes or Petabytes? (1)

Jon Chatow (25684) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205288)

Indeed, the figures are almost certainly wrong. FWIW, the old LHC experiments (of which there were 6, I think) would generate raw data at about a few gigabytes every 10ms, so their raw data requirements are really quite, well, astronomical :-). Of course, this data then had to be immediately processed, as there was far too much of it to record as such. The 'machine room' at CERN is just amazing - still has the NSA-mandated guard posts from when the SGIs, Crays, and so on that they had were export-licenced 'munitions' (though, when I asked about off-site back-up, the guide looked at me as if I were mad to suggest such an extravagance). As the whole point of the new collider experiment is to gather data over shorter time spans in greater detail at higher energy levels, I would imagine (but ICBW) that the raw data rates, and also the needed storage requirements, are going to be just plain silly...

Re:Terabytes or Petabytes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205399)

There is research going on in the FreeBSD camps about creating very large clusters in order to harness massive disk power. Brooks, if you're reading, a few pointers to your literature would be nice.

A joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204976)

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!

*snicker*

hadron colliders, that is.

if there's one thing i hate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205325)

it's a hardon collision

Petabytes..... (1)

Tsali (594389) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204977)

Wait 'til the NeoCons get a hold of this term.

Petabytes don't get you laid, nerds. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204978)

Stop talking about petabytes, go to PETA and oyu might get laid by a goat. Or buy rohypnol, I use that to get laid.

Whats the difference? (0)

110010001000 (697113) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204984)

Whats the difference between this and a SAN (storage area network) which has been around for years?

Re:Whats the difference? (1)

Ingolfke (515826) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205183)

Well... this would be a STAN (storage tank area network). See, the key difference is that this technology combines the data into a "tank" and the SAN doesn't. Sorry for having to use all this technical jargon.

Re:Whats the difference? (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205188)

If you had read the article (which you have not), you would notice that the very first line of the second article says this --


The IBM TotalStorage SAN File System (based on IBM Storage Tank(TM) technology) is designed to help reduce the complexity of managing files within SANs.


The first article also says that --


Storage Tank also makes a distributed storage network look and behave just like a local network. No matter where or on what operating system any piece of stored data might reside, it can be located quickly and used by anyone else on the network.


I guess this is just a central access implementation of SAN for very large amounts of data.

Re:Whats the difference? (0)

110010001000 (697113) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205283)

I did read the article. What is the difference between this and a SAN? The word "tank"? This is just a SAN folks, although it is a good ad for IBM I guess.

Re:Whats the difference? (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205368)

I guess the difference is the fact that unlike SAN, this is a central implementation of something that can be accessed like yet another network drive.

So all your distributed data is shown as a single drive that you can access. The article also sounded like SAN is independent of the number of systems on the network, immaterial of the storage capacity needed.

Re:Whats the difference? (0)

110010001000 (697113) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205435)

Yes, thats what a SAN is. I am very familiar with SAN's. I don't see the difference here except it is an advertisement for IBM's version of a SAN. Can we all advertise here now? Or just those of us who purchase banner ads from VALinux?

Re:Whats the difference? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205530)

Wrong. A SAN is a Storage Area Network (or a System Area Network, but in this case I'm pretty sure they're talking about Storage). Anyway, that's just the network used to access the data. It has nothing to do with how the data is actually stored or accessed...it's only refering to the network architecture. IBM's stuff is different from a SAN...whether it's worthwhile or not remains to be seen, but it is different.

Re:Whats the difference? (0)

110010001000 (697113) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205663)

What are you talking about? A SAN is a complete system, not just a network. A SAN is composed of storage units (disks) and connecting equipment.

Dewey (1)

KillerHamster (645942) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204985)

'Storage Tank has the potential to become to an organization's data what the Dewey Decimal system is to a library,'

I'd be careful about making that comparison, unless you want a lawsuit from the Online Computer Library Center.

huh (0, Redundant)

xao gypsie (641755) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204986)

funny how pr0n still seems to drive technology..

xao

Re:huh (1)

motox (312416) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205168)

The big gang bang ?

Buy two (1)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 10 years ago | (#7204987)

Had a hard drive crash the other day without backups.

Are there any easy solutions that can write data out to two HDs redundantly, perhaps to two SCSI or USB external drives?

Re:Buy two (1)

Gldm (600518) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205007)

You mean like a RAID1? Yeah I think there might be something for that somewhere...

Re:Buy two (1)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205161)

Personal desktop RAID? They sell that at Best Buy?

Re:Buy two (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205201)

Maybe not at Best Buy, but at a store like CompUSA for sure.

Re:Buy two (1)

nhaines (622289) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205462)

My last two MSI motherboard do support IDE RAID on board. I donno how reliable that is, since I never have enough money to buy two harddrives at once, but I assume it's fairly robust. Maybe not what you want to use for a huge international company. Anyhow, you might want to look into a motherboard with RAID features. What better time for an upgrade? If not, you should be able to find something at CompUSA. I like PC Club (http://www.pcclub.com/) which is owned by the same company. But somehow the employees really know their stuff and can be found when you need them (because they're behind the counter).

Re:Buy two (1)

sweetooth (21075) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205479)

I dunno if best buy would have these items, but they are certainly available. Lots of current motherboards come with either IDE or SATA RAID controllers onboard. Or you can pick up one of several PCI cards and add RAID-0 or RAID-1 storage to your PC.

http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?p roduct_code=50199130 [compusa.com]
http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?p roduct_code=295058 [compusa.com]
http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?p roduct_code=50198865 [compusa.com]

Amazing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7204992)

Just like everyone's gunna say:

WOW, that can hold A LOT OF PORN!

From what I've experienced with IBM... (1)

Morologous (201459) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205006)


That's 90,000 dollars and comes preinstalled with one 36Gb drive. Additional drives can be purchased at the low-low price of 4,000 dollars apiece.

Re:From what I've experienced with IBM... (1)

krymsin01 (700838) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205656)

Or get your own free piggybacked on the next microsoft exploit. ;)

Imagine... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205009)

a beowulf cluster of these
.
.
.
.
Oh
.
.
.
.
.
wait
.
.
It's already a cluster, Never mind.

That's a lot of data (1)

Compuser (14899) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205017)

Assuming you can put 6 HDDs in 1U enclosure and a
standard 44U rack and those 300 Gig monster HDDs,
that's still 12 racks worth of HDDs. Holy...

Re:That's a lot of data (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205113)

Have you ever heard of StorageTek's BladeStore product? You'll have to forgive them for capitalizing on the "blade" bandwagon, but it's still pretty cool. Their "blades" (not the same thing as a "blade server" blade) hold 1.25 TB each, and they put 60 in a cabinet. That's 75 TB per rack, and you can have two racks per Fibre Channel controller.

That's pretty damn dense.

Re:That's a lot of data (1)

Compuser (14899) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205193)

That's 4 HDDs per 1U and so 14 racks to get to a
petabyte. A bit more sparse than I thought could
reasonably be built but still pretty dense.
Do you know what power consumption of one of these
racks is? Just wondering if power would cost more
in, say one year of operation, than initial
system cost (minus hard drives themselves).

Re:That's a lot of data (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205380)

40-column hard-wrapped messages are not a sign of intelligence, friend.

A bit more sparse than I thought could
reasonably be built but still pretty dense.


BladeStore is the densest storage system in the world. It's not "pretty dense." It's twice as dense as anybody else can do.

Do you know what power consumption of one of these
racks is?


No, but it draws about 22 amps. Do the math.

Just wondering if power would cost more
in, say one year of operation, than initial
system cost (minus hard drives themselves).


There's no such thing as "initial system cost minus the hard drives." This is a storage system.

And the answer is no.

Re:That's a lot of data (1)

Compuser (14899) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205437)

Sure there is: racks , controllers, cabling, power
conditioners, heck even humidity controllers and
vents. Hard drives are the only high volume part
here but also one that you can add as needed. All
else is fixed cost. Hence my question.
Also, 22A at what voltage? 5V?

Engineering/design challenge (1)

Ingolfke (515826) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205303)

So would anyone take a shot at actually specifying the hardware and cost for a 1 Petabyte system? Include HDs, systems, # of racks, (don't forget the switches for the network). Assume no RAID.

Re:Engineering/design challenge (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205630)

3,125 320GB Maxtor HDD's @ $283= $884,375
391 8 bay 4U rackmount encluses @ $140= $54,740
391 4 Channel IDE controllers @ $17= $6,647
391 CPU+Mobo+Ram combo's @$100 = $39,100
22 racks @ $328= $7,216
17 24 port switches @ $61 = $1,037
4 Spools of Cat5 cabling @ $40/1000' = $160
800 Cat5 connectors @ $10/100 = $80

Grand total = $991,355

So roughly $1 Million with shipping for a cheap arse, cruddy, minimilistic way of doing it.

Re:That's a lot of data (1)

Cheeze (12756) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205430)

hopefully you're not actually putting them in a rackmount case. It would be much more efficient to rig it up where they are just bare drives out in the open. Sure, it looks like hell, but you should be able to stack almost all of the drives in a single rack with a bad-ass motherboard and with 3 or 4 of these [3ware.com] in each of them. You should be able to find a decent dual motherboard with 4 64-bit pci slots [amdmb.com] on them. That would be (4x12+4) 52 drives per computer. At 300GB per drive, that would be over 15 terabytes per computer. You would still need about 64 of them to get your petabyte, but you should be able to put 8-10 per rack.

my math could be wrong though. Still, if you want it to look pretty, it's probably better to go blow your cash on fancy dells, or get Sun to custom make you a $50mil storage solution.

Hmmm.... (1)

Quixote (154172) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205060)

Maxtor introduces [slashdot.org] a "monster", and IBM introduces a "storage tank". Coincidence? I think not...

:-) for the :-)-impaired

Now I'll sit back and wait for the obligatory "... bah! Tank-shmank! Gimme a few of these Maxtor monsters, and I'll roll my own "storage tank" using a spare full-tower chassis, a PIC controller and some duct tape..."

Re:Hmmm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205440)


Maxtor introduces a "monster", and IBM introduces a "storage tank". Coincidence? I think not...

Maxtor smash!!!

Re:Hmmm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205655)

First of all, if I ever get to the point where it looks like I'll need to invest 90 grand in porn storage: I sincerly hope someone will take me aside and point to the dim blue dot in the sky that I once knew as reality.

Secondly, damn right I'll roll my own. If I call up IBM and ask them about installing one in my basement, they're going to ask a question I don't want to answer. (As if I'd just add anybody to my "list.")

Lastly, if you're still enamored with duct tape, I suggest you investigate the joys of fiberglass in a can.

This is old hat. (1)

Magus311X (5823) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205066)

This has been done. I think they call it KaZaa though.

-----

not that much (0)

pizza_milkshake (580452) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205072)

considering it isn't too difficult or expensive for an average Joe to assemble a terabyte's-worth of storage from off-the-shelf parts; a petabyte isn't really that much.

Re:not that much (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205153)

"Considering it isn't too difficult or expensive for an average Joe to assemble a gigabyte's worth of storage from off-the-shelf parts, a terabyte isn't really that much."

That remark would have been stupid in 1990, and it's stupid now.

Re:not that much (1)

evildead (150474) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205287)

Only about 1000 times as much.

Consider that you can get a 4U 24 drive array, and if you stock it full of 300GB drives, for 7.2 TB.

Now, fill up the rack. 72 TB.

Now fill up _ten_ of those racks. 720TB.

(Actually, you'd need about 14 racks, but ...)

That would be 22 feet by 7 feet of storage -- not raided, just JBOD.

Starter Kit? (1)

jmt9581 (554192) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205077)

"Get your own 'starter configuration' for only $90,000!"

Can I get $10,000 if I include some Cracker Jack box tops? If not, I'm ordering a petabyte-capacity storage tank for sea monkeys.

:P

How useless is Storage Tank? Your bet... (2, Interesting)

ezh (707373) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205106)

Storage Tank comes extremely late - it was first promised to come out in early 2001.

According to this article [theregister.co.uk] at The Register, IBM failed to provide such features of Storage Tank as, "link servers and storage systems from all vendors, making it possible to view and access a file from any system. ". Instead, it will only support AIX and Windows platforms starting this November. Support for other Unix versions, including Linux, is expected not earlier than mid-2004.

Please tell me I'm not the only one... (2, Funny)

BeneathTheVeil (305107) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205111)

...who read that one link as 'Large Hardon Collider' ...yeesh, I think I need to get out more.

obligitory... (1)

focitrixilous P (690813) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205124)

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of storage tanks!

Imagine... (4, Funny)

billbaggins (156118) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205132)

Man, imagine a Beo... <blam>

<thud>

Re:Imagine... (1)

Karma Star (549944) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205602)

Man, imagine a Red Sox world championship...

GO SOX!!! FUCK THE YANKEES!

Re:Imagine... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205642)

oops, watch out for those hadrons!

Hmm... (2, Interesting)

JoeLinux (20366) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205163)

I always thought a good idea was multiple RAID storage across the entire network. So all the files are spread throughout the network. With multiple copies so if two or three computers go down, that data is not lost...kind of a cross between SAN and RAID.

Re:Hmm... (1)

vrmlguy (120854) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205382)

I'd be interested in how a Storage Tank differs from EMC's Centera, which provides WAN access to large amounts of storage. Centera is a Linux-based rack of P2P nodes with ATA-based storage, all accessible only via HTTP. You "POST" the content of a file, and get back a cryptographic checksum as a file identifier which you then use to retreive the content later. This lets you verify that the data is still intact. Here's the marketing-speak:

Centera's architecture is based on redundant arrays of independent nodes (RAIN)--offering petabyte scalability. Adding capacity is easy: Centera auto-discovers and configures the new capacity as it's installed.

When using content mirroring protection, all information objects are synchronously mirrored within a local Centera cluster to support automatic recovery from component failures. Centera also can be configured to maintain duplicate copies of fixed content at a remote site to guard against site disaster.

Centera continuously monitors to detect and repair soft errors. It also automatically reconfigures itself and replicates objects as necessary if hardware failures occur such as disks or nodes--which are automatically reported through EMC's remote monitoring system.

Re:Hmm... (Mango Medley and Coda) (1)

Insightfill (554828) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205567)

Sounds a lot like the Mango Medley file system (for Windows) and Coda (for Unix/Linux systems). Info at nearest Google-search.

The Mango system was only produced for versions of Windows up to 95, with spotty NT support. The premise was pretty cool: each user of the system allocated part of their hard drive to a single network share. All of this space was added up and appeared as a single shared mapping to the network. Each file was copied to two users for safety. If a user accessed a file, they would get a copy and someone else would lose it. If someone's computer became unavailable, the rest of the system would reconfigure. It was sort of a large RAID-1 system.

Coda information available here: http://www.coda.cs.cmu.edu/

Petafile (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205167)

So what's a file called in a petabyte-capacity storage tank?

A petafile!

Ha, I crack myself up.

Hrmmm.... just to point out that there is an (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205176)

open source solution that already stores 100s of terabytes that is called LUSTRE... LUSTRE is already deployed in a few live aplications run by the NCSE (hope I remembered that right)....

At the symposium this year, the fellow mentionned they were working on scaling to petabyte storage for next year.

Re:Hrmmm.... just to point out that there is an (2, Funny)

Ingolfke (515826) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205204)

But do they have a "tank"? That's the real question here.

Think of the children! (4, Funny)

Saeger (456549) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205194)

Dear Manufacturer,
Only petafiles have need for petabytes! Consider yourself boycotted!

Sincerely,
Mentally Challenged Parents Association

(What's a Petafile, Walter?)

--

Re:Think of the children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205557)

every bowler knows ``Shut the fuck up Donny!''

What the fuck is going on with moderation? (0, Offtopic)

Mr. Ophidian Jones (653797) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205205)

Look at the score breakdowns on some of these stories. There are almost no Score:3 posts -- meaning that no moderation is occuring. Did CmdrTaco break something?

Re:What the fuck is going on with moderation? (1)

vastabo (530415) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205520)

Maybe this story kinda sucks...
Maybe all the mods got drunk and stayed in bed...
OR maybe no one has said anything funny, informative, or interesting...
We'll never know...

Shh! (1, Redundant)

Transcendent (204992) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205219)

Storage Tank has the potential to become to an organization's data what the Dewey Decimal system is to a library.

Shh!!! Don't mention Dewey Decimal or you might get sued [slashdot.org] !!

Storing Data on Beta Technology (2, Insightful)

Manhigh (148034) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205335)

Hope they have lots of backup. Of course, how do you backup a system like this?

Re:Storing Data on Beta Technology (1, Funny)

DrDNA (713626) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205491)

Obviously, on a billion floppy disks.

Similar to a thought I had before. (1)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205366)

I've been considering an idea like this for years. I mean, what's the problem in splitting a file system up into lots of smaller chunks and storing them on many different computers? My idea was to introduce redundancy so that even if not all of the nodes are active or reachable at any given time, the information could be located or constructed from other information. By doing so, a distributed storage system could be placed on millions of computers worldwide, in a sort of SETI@home-like setup, and users could donate a tiny chunk of their hard drive to help scientific research or student projects or whatever, where the people using the storage can't afford to pay for it. What's 50 megs, or 100, or 200, in today's hard drives anyway? People could easily "donate" the unused space on their drives and never feel a difference.

Re:Similar to a thought I had before. (1)

itsari (703841) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205599)

By doing so, a distributed storage system could be placed on millions of computers worldwide, in a sort of SETI@home-like setup, and users could donate a tiny chunk of their hard drive to help scientific research or student projects or whatever, where the people using the storage can't afford to pay for it. What's 50 megs, or 100, or 200, in today's hard drives anyway? People could easily "donate" the unused space on their drives and never feel a difference.

And my hard drive starts smoking and you lose some important data. Or I stop paying for internet access. (Blasphemy!)

root's eye view (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205374)

# df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda1 999T 48G 998T 0% /
# wget --theinternet

Muahahahaha!

Is it half-empty or half-full? (1)

Mesozoic44 (646282) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205383)

The Register [theregister.co.uk] claims that contents may have settled during shipping.

Again ... (0, Offtopic)

petabyte (238821) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205388)

... I have nothing profound to say but hey, as my nick is a petabyte I figured I should chime in.

Then again, I'm only a petabyte here, usually I'm in a larger configuration. [yottabyte.org]

Ah, good times good times ..

Isn't this just P2P? (1)

Hollins (83264) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205394)

Isn't this just one way to implement a P2P network? By selling it for enterprise use, IBM is supporting the argument that P2P networks have legitimate use and should not be outlawed as the RIAA has attempted.

I have not used either, but Storage Tank seems to deliver similar functionality as Waste, though on a larger scale and with a different UI paradigm. Perhaps if Nullsoft had released Waste as a way for small and medium sized businesses to share files, AOL would have acted differently.

mmmm pron... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205409)

That's a lot of pron.

Hell, who needs pron anyway? My disk is getting hard just thinking about having so many bits to fill.

I think I'll hold off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7205439)

I think I'll hold off until it's the size of a quarter and costs $50.

Woah... (1)

LnxAddct (679316) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205459)

That is the hottest thing I've seen all day!(My girlfriend is out of town)

Dewey Decimal System? (1)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205500)

While the Dewey Decimal system was revolutionary for its day, it's long fallen into disuse in any serious library. A lot of school libraries still use it and some local libraries use it, but I can't think of one university or college library I've been to that didn't use the library of congress system. It's a lot more useful as most people who have used both would say.

Also, it's interesting to note that the library at Amherst College, where the Dewey decimal system was created (by Dewey!) no longer uses the Dewey decimal system.

cool.... (0)

cRueLio (679516) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205511)

cool, now I can keep all my pr0n, illegally downloaded movies, and music in one place. it would take big pipes to fill this tank, if you know what i'm saying

I'm sorry. (1)

veg_all (22581) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205539)

It's still not enough.

Petabyte aka a petafile (1)

xanasin (612377) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205587)

Hey, if you make a file that is 100GB you would have a file that is a petabye or a petafile...get it hehe :) flam me if u want

Isn't this pretty cheap for what it is? (1)

snarkasaurus (627205) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205614)

Maybe I'm just old, but doesn't it strike anyone that a system built to handle petabytes of data should cost more than $90,000? That's not a whole lot of money for enterprize level hardware.

Hell, I remeber seeing an IBM System 38 with 16 gigabytes of storage, bloody thing took up a room and cost a couple million bucks. All they did with it was keep a driver's licence database on it and run print batches.

$90,000? CHEAP!

FINALLY (1)

redJag (662818) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205615)

a porn solution that works!

Dog dollars (1)

antic (29198) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205622)

Oh my god, that's $630,000 dog dollars!

New use for P2P Technology (1)

chrispyman (710460) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205669)

It seems that IBMs system is just a specialized P2P file sharing/serving network, not really anything new and "revolutionary."

If you do the math... (4, Informative)

Apuleius (6901) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205680)

...you will discover that 1 petabyte is enough
room for more Divx encoded porn than a man could
watch in a lifetime with no sleep or bathroom
breaks. Think about that for a second.

Ultimate Tivo Hack (0, Redundant)

smz420 (308094) | more than 10 years ago | (#7205681)

Oh man, imagine hacking Tivo to work with this!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...