• fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    SSDs aren’t great for long term archival since the nand needs to periodically be refreshed. You can build a better SSD, but that compromises storage capacity. HDDs are better, but they have other issues from sitting around not being used. Disks like these are a pretty good backup method if produced correctly. If is the big key, 100 layers sounds like a lot of layers to manufacture correctly, and you won’t know your dat is gone until it’s unreadable.

    But will it be able to replace tape for long term backup? LTO 9 is supposedly available, and up to 18TB not compressed. LTO-10 is 36, and supposedly LTO-14 is going to be 576 TB but that seems overly ambitious.

    • MagicShel@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      At these sizes, you could have one or two error correction layers within the disc to let you read the data through errors. I’d be surprised if that isn’t the case. Sacrificing 1-2% of the storage space for better reliability is an obvious trade-off.

    • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Also LTO is rather expensive, way out of range for the home archivist. Discs tend to be much cheaper! Hopefully this is the case for these as well.