I've been wondering about this for a while. Look back, back then, platter density was very low. 80GB per platter. Now it's 320GB per platter. That's like 4 times. But, the physical platter size hasnt changed right? So, this naturally means data is recorded over a much smaller area on the platter right? Doesn't this also mean, having such tiny area, it can be unreadable easier, for some reasons at times... maybe it loses magnetism somehow?
What im asking is, is higher platter density more prone to data loss?
Platter size, fewer but bigger the quieter right? But..
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
-
MikeC
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12285
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Contact:
Your concern makes sense... but you'd have to think that the increased data density has been accompanied by improvements in the precision of the heads. Enterprises that run server farms and maintain huge databases are NOT going to accept worse reliability.
Last edited by MikeC on Thu Jul 31, 2008 8:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Like Mike said, usually higher areal density goes hand in hand with recording improvements.
It is true that all else being equal, data stored in a smaller space is more susceptible to errors, but recording improvements try to mitigate this problem. That was the big reason why so many companies switched to perpendicular recording. This allowed higher areal densities without increasing the risk of catastrophic data loss.
I have heard from a couple places that there may be a limit to how dense magnetic data storage can go. It's something about quantum physics, but as I know pretty much nothing about quantum physics, I couldn't tell you any detail on it.
So as a long answer, storing data in a smaller space can cause a loss in reliability, but companies are always improving their recording technology to maintain a good level of reliability. It may be the case that some day we hit the limit on what we can do, but it won't be for a while.
It is true that all else being equal, data stored in a smaller space is more susceptible to errors, but recording improvements try to mitigate this problem. That was the big reason why so many companies switched to perpendicular recording. This allowed higher areal densities without increasing the risk of catastrophic data loss.
I have heard from a couple places that there may be a limit to how dense magnetic data storage can go. It's something about quantum physics, but as I know pretty much nothing about quantum physics, I couldn't tell you any detail on it.
So as a long answer, storing data in a smaller space can cause a loss in reliability, but companies are always improving their recording technology to maintain a good level of reliability. It may be the case that some day we hit the limit on what we can do, but it won't be for a while.
Worry not, There's plenty of room at the bottom.