(OT) archiving as opposed to backing up

From: Patrick/VCM SysOp <patrick_at_vintagecomputermarketplace.com>
Date: Wed Sep 22 14:35:19 2004

> Well, let's see here: 73GB / 5GB at the $9.95 level = about
> 14 subscriptions = $140 per month so they break even in 3
> months. Not bad.

True, but after adding the cost of the processors that manage those drives
(SAN or otherwise), plus networking hardware, a little bandwidth, and a few
headcount to keep it all glued together, it's an impressive achievement.
You have to work hard to keep all that overhead from eroding your margins

> Maybe they're just doing it dirt cheap Google-style: just
> throw a huge number of cheap hard drives at the problem and
> use lots of mirroring. If one fails, throw it out and
> replace it, then re-mirror.

It would have to be. I guess the real question is, what's controlling those
drives. At the scale at which I'm used to buying hardware, I think it
wouldn't play. Google-scale buying power is my geek wet dream.

One thing seems certain: they oversubscribe. That alone may be the answer.

Received on Wed Sep 22 2004 - 14:35:19 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:37:31 BST