[Beowulf] Consumer vs. Enterprise Hard Drives in Clusters
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.
Nifty Tom Mitchell niftyompi at niftyegg.comFri Jan 23 14:41:08 PST 2009
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Consumer vs. Enterprise Hard Drives in Clusters
- Next message: [Beowulf] : Q&A
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 01:08:05PM -0800, Lux, James P wrote: > Subject: Re: [Beowulf] Consumer vs. Enterprise Hard Drives in Clusters > > * Dramatically better vibration resistance. > is > > Wouldn't the effect of vibrations from multiple drives depend > greatly on the mechanical properties of the bay enclosure and > the chassis itself? > > Yes,but... > > For example, I have a 16 bay enclosure that's > built like a tank (I know because I dropped it once). I would > think that the vibration of one drive would barely be noticed > by others. > > ...stiffer and stronger might actually transmit vibration better and be worse! Yes... Mounting of disks for reliability is interesting. Quiet chassis often add rubber gromets to attenuate acoustic coupling to the chassis. Way back c. 1982 a drive vendor recommended mounting their drive with only three screws. The fourth mounting point stressed the drive frame from a plane and introduced seek problems. i.e. Our chassis design was 'too' stiff... but it did survive a +30 foot drop to the runway from a 747 baggage loading ramp The logic was: Two points == line; three points == plane; four points == warped surface. -- Regards, T o m M i t c h e l l
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Consumer vs. Enterprise Hard Drives in Clusters
- Next message: [Beowulf] : Q&A
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
