Scalus

Winter School Storage Systems

Hard Disks Andr Brinkmann

Agenda
Hard Disks History Architecture of Hard Disks
Disk head, -arm, Calcula?on of access ?mes Zoning

Trends
Inuence of TPI, BPI, on performance and price

Storage Hierarchy
Primary Storage: CPU Register (1 Cycle, ns) Cache (10-200 Cycles, 0,02 - 0,5s) Local memory (0,2 - 4s) NUMA-memory (2 - 10 x local memory) Secondary Storage: Hard Disks (2-20 ms) Solid State Disks (0,05 - 0,5 ms) Cache (0,05 - 0,5 ms) Ter?ary Storage Exchangeable media(Tapes, Floppies, CD, ... (ms - minutes) Tape Libraries, op?cal jukeboxes (few seconds - minutes) Tape libraries (few minutes days)

Kilo - Mega Bytes MegaGiga Bytes

Giga-Tera Bytes Tera-Peta Bytes

History: Punch Card

Punch cards Used since middle of 18th century for repea?ng tasks, e.g. in looms or music instruments Hollerith punch card Firstly used in US census in 1890 Standardized in 1928 Used in computer systems since Konrad Zuses Z1 in 1937 Layout of punch cards has had inuence on development of computer languages (Cobol, Fortran) Data processing needs three sets of punch cards: input / output / program Capacity of 80 bytes (80 rows, 12 columns)
Punch cards for a pipe organ

Slide based on lecture from Prof. R. Burns (Baltimore) / Wikipedia

Tapes
Tapes are used in computers since 1951 (UNIVAC I) Density of 128 bytes/inch on 8 tracks (6 data tracks/ 1 parity/ 1 clock) Speed of up to 100 in/s Used to store batch applica?ons High latency for random access data Start/stop mode if input stream is too slow Low performance High impact on media life span Today only used as oine backup media LTO drives have performance of up to 140 Mbyte/s (LTO-5) and uncompressed capacity of 1.5 Tbyte/tape
Tape from 1985

Slide based on lecture from Prof. R. Burns (Baltimore) / Wikipedia

Tapes
Tape durability 15 to 30 years archival 5000 cartridge loads/unloads Approximately 260 full le passes
One le pass is equal to wri?ng enough data to ll an en?re tape

Oracle StorageTek StreamLine SL8500 Modular Library System Up to 640 tape drives 100,000 slots and 1,000 PB (utilizing 2:1 compression) capacity
Slide based on Wikipedia / Oracle

History: Hard Disks

IBM introduced rst hard disk IBM 350 in 1956 50 plalers 24 Zoll Capacity of 5 MByte Latency of 600 ms Hard disks have been random access memory Hard disks have been small and have been used as main memory, tapes have been persistent memory Today: Hard disks are secondary memory and are moving into backup and archival sector
IBM 305 RAMAC, two IBM 350 disks in the foreground and middle

Slide based on lecture from Prof. R. Burns (Baltimore) / Wikipedia

History: Hard Disks

Data density Mbit/sq. in. Capacity of Unit Shown Megabytes

1973: 1. 7 Mbit/sq. in 0.14 GBytes

1979: 7. 7 Mbit/sq. in 2.3 GBytes

Source: New York Times, 2/23/98, page C3, Makers of disk drives crowd even more data into even smaller spaces
Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

History: Hard Disks

1989: 63 Mbit/sq. in 60 GBytes

1997: 1450 Mbit/sq. in 2.3 GBytes

1997: 3090 Mbit/sq. in 8.1 GBytes

Source: New York Times, 2/23/98, page C3, Makers of disk drives crowd even more data into even smaller spaces

Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

History: Hard Disks

Evolu?on of hard disks has been driven by form factor and capacity, not by performance 1970s: Mainframes and 14 magne?c disks 1980s: Minicomputers, servers with 8 magne?c disks and 5.25 hard disks 1990s:
Pizza box PCs: 3.5 hard disks Laptops, Notebooks: 2.5hard disks Smaller devices typically do not use hard disks => 1.8 magne?c disks not yet successful
Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Seagate DB35 (2006)

750 GB, 3.5 disk 7200 RPM; ATA100 / SATA 9.4 wals (idle) 8.5 ms avg. seek 100 - 300 MB/s transfer rate

394 = 0.52 / GB

Source: www.seagate.com

Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 (2009)

1 TB, 3.5-inch disk 7200 RPM; 3 Gbit/s SATA 8 wals idle, 9.6 wals busy ? ms avg. seek 120MB/s sustained transfer rate

89 = 0.09 / GB

Source: www.seagate.com

1 Hard disks
2006 Hitachi Travelstar C4K60
71 x 54 x 8 mm 60 GB, 4200 RPM, 15 ms seek 2 plalers, 4 heads Digital cameras, Palm PCs

2006 Hitachi Microdrive 3K8

40 x 30 x 5 mm Weight: 13g 8 GB, 26 MB/s transfer rate

Source: www.hitachigst.com

Magne?c Disks
Purpose in computer systems:
Long-term, inexpensive storage for les Backup for main-memory. Large, inexpensive, slow level in the memory hierarchy (virtual memory)

Main Memory

Control

Input
Disk

Processor

Data Path

Output

Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Photo of Disk Head, Arm, Actuator

Spindle" Arm" Head"

Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Actuator"

Platters (12)"

Disk Device Terminology

Arm! Head! Sector! Inner! Outer! Track! Track! Platter!

Actuator!

Several plalers, with informa?on recorded magne?cally on both surfaces (usually) Bits recorded in tracks, which in turn divided into sectors (e.g., 512 Bytes) Actuator moves head (end of arm) over track (seek), wait for sector rotate under head, then read or write
Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Read- / Write Heads

Recording Technology

Perpendicular Recording

http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/research/recording_head/pr/PerpendicularAnimation.html

Disk Drive Performance I

Outer Inner Sector Head Arm Controller Spindle Track Track Platter Actuator

Disk Latency = Seek Time + Rota?on Time + Transfer Time + Controller Overhead
Seek Time? depends on no. tracks to move arm, speed of actuator Rota?on Time? depends on speed disk rotates, how far sector is from head Transfer Time? depends on data rate (bandwidth) of disk (f(bit density,rpm)), size of request
Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Disk Drive Performance II

Average distance of sector from head? 1/2 ?me of a rota?on
7200 Revolu?ons Per Minute 120 Rev/sec 1 revolu?on = 1/120 sec 8.33 milliseconds 1/2 rota?on (revolu?on) 4.17 ms

Average no. tracks to move arm?

Disk industry standard benchmark?

Size of Disk cache can strongly aect performance!

Cache built into disk system, OS knows nothing

Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Seek Time
Inuence factors on seeks ?me Accelera?on of disk arm:
Accelera?on between 30-40g Higher weight requires higher forces on disk arm Smaller weight can lead to deforma?on of disk arm head crash Higher TPI and BPI allow smaller diameter at same capacity Higher accelera?on and smaller distances lead to smaller seek ?mes

Areal density:

Smaller disk diameter enable lighter disk arm

Slide based on C. Ruemmler and J. Wilkes: An introduction to disk drive modeling

Average Seek Time

Average seek ?me describes important aspect of access ?me Average seek distance is 1/3 of full seek distance (Why?) Dierent possibili?es to calculate average seek ?me
1. Measure ?me for access of 1/3 of full seek 2. Divide full seek by 3 3. Sum all ?me for all possible seek distances and divide by number of seeks 4. Weight dierent seek distances from 3. with their access probabili?es

Which calcula?on model is best suited to describe average seek ?me?

Slide based on C. Ruemmler and J. Wilkes: An introduction to disk drive modeling

Average Seek Time

Warum betrgt die durchschnilliche Seek-Distanz nur 1/3 der maximalen Seek-Distanz? Nehme hierfr an, dass von jedem Track ein Zugri auf jeden anderen Track erfolgt. 1 mal Von Track 1 Zugri auf Track 2,3,,n mit den Distanzen 1,2,,(n-2), (n-1) Von Track 2 Zugri auf Track 3,4,,n mit den Distanzen 1,2,,(n-2) Von Track (n-1) nur Zugri auf Track n mit der Distanz 1
2 mal (n-1) mal

Hieraus kann die folgende Formel gebildet werden:

Seek =

i (n i )
i =1

n 1

i
i =1

n 1

(n 1) n (2n 1) 6 =1 = n in = n =1 n 1 3 (n 1) n i 2 i =1

n 1

Hilfsmilel Average Seek Time

Es gilt fr die folgenden Reihen:
i =
i =1 n

n (n + 1) 2

i2 =
i =1

n (n + 1) (2n + 1) 6

Fallacy Average Seek Time

Manufacturer need standard benchmark to compare average seek ?me
Calculate all seeks from all tracks and divide by number of seeks => average seek ?me Real average depends on data layout on hard disk and access palern of the applica?ons => applica?ons ozen access nearby tracks

Rule: Measured seek ?me typically between and of seek ?me on data sheet
Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Bestandteile der Seek-Zeit

Ein Seek besteht aus
Einer Beschleunigungsphase: Der Festplalenarm wird bis zum erreichen des halben Weges oder der maximalen Geschwindigkeit beschleunigt Einer Coast-Phase: Einem Bereich maximaler Geschwindigkeit Einer Verzgerungsphase: Der Festplalenarm wird bis zum Erreichen des Zielgebietes abgebremst Selle-Phase: Der Controller jus?ert den Festplalenkopf

Sehr kurze Seeks werden durch Selle-Zeit dominiert (1-3 ms), bzw. bestehen nur aus der Selle-Zeit Kurze Seeks (200 - 400 Tracks) benden sich nur in der Beschleunigungsphase Bei langen Seeks bewegt sich der Festplalenarm hauptschlich mit konstanter Geschwindigkeit
Zeit propor?onal zur En~ernung plus einem Overhead Zeit propor?onal zur Wurzel des En~ernung plus der Selle-Zeit

Folie basiert auf C. Ruemmler and J. Wilkes: An introduction to disk drive modeling

Selle Time
Die Feinposi?onierung des Kopfes an dem Ende der Festplalenarmbewegung ist Aufgabe des Track-Following-Systems Reposi?onierung des Festplalenarms auch dann notwendig,
wenn nur der Kopf und nicht der Track gewechselt wird (entspricht ca. 1/3 der Selle-Zeit) wenn nach dem Lesen des letzten Sektors eines Tracks zu dem ersten Sektor des folgenden Tracks gesprungen wird (volle Selle-zeit)

Mit der Trackdichte steigt die Zeit fr die Kopfwechselzeit => geht gegen Selle-Zeit des Festplalenarms Bei Lesezugrien knnen Daten bereits vor Beendigung der Feinposi?onierung gelesen werden

Geschwindigkeitssteigerung bei Hit Keine Verluste bei Miss Unterschiede der Selle-Zeit fr Lesen und Schreiben bis zu 0,75 ms

Folie basiert auf C. Ruemmler and J. Wilkes: An introduction to disk drive modeling

Einuss des Datenlayouts

Festplale teilt Daten in Sektoren ein
Gre zwischen 256 und 1024 Bytes Mapping auf physikalische Sektoren auf der Festplale Bad Sectors knnen versteckt werden und es kann low-level Performance-Op?mierung durchgefhrt werden

Zoning: Adjazente Tracks werden in Zonen mit gleicher Anzahl Sektoren eingeteilt (typisch 3 20 Zonen) Track Skewing: Sektor 0 eines jeden Tracks wird verschoben, um die Zeit fr den Head- oder Track-Switch zu kompensieren und mit nahezu voller Bandbreite zugreifen zu knnen Sparing: Es werden Sektoren auf der Festplale reserviert, auf die defekte Sektoren gemapped werden
Folie basiert auf C. Ruemmler and J. Wilkes: An introduction to disk drive modeling

Zoning: Inner and Outer Tracks

Ini?ally: Number of sectors / track the same for inner and outer tracks Technology enables par??oning of disks into zones
BPI (Bits per Inch) on outer track smaller than on inner track Each zone chooses number of sectors based on its inner track BPI nearly constant within zone Higher capacity on disk Higher data rate on outer sectors (rpm constant)

Performance on outer tracks 1.7-?mes performance on inner track

Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Fallacy: Data Transfer Rate

Manufacturer provides data rate accessing surface of hard disk on data sheets Each sector contains error correc?ng codes (up to 20% of sector size) and metainforma?on Space between sectors and tracks Rule: Hard disk are slower by a factor of 1,3 compared to data sheets
Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Hard Disk Trends

Capacity: +100%/year (2x / year)
Hard disk capacity has grown that fast that number of plalers per disks has been reduced (some disks only have a single plaler)

Transfer rate: +40%/year (2x / 2 year) Rota?on- and seek ?me: -8%/year (1/2 / 10 years) Areal Density

MB/: > 100%/ Jahr (2x / year)

Bits per inch, BPI on a track #Tracks on plaler (Tracks per inch, TPI) Important: Bit density per areal unit (Bits/Inch2), called areal density = BPI x TPI Fewer Asics per hard disks and higher areal density

Slide based on lecture from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley)

Hard Disk Capacity

Hard Disk Areal Density

Hard Disk TPI, BPI,

Hard Disk BPI/TPI

Magne?c Media Roadmap

Hard Disk Roadmap

Hard Disk Internal Data Rate

Hard Disk Access Times

Comparison HDD - DRAM

Costs

Technology Trends
100 CPU Network Normalized relative to 1990 Memory bandwidth Hard disk bandwidth Network latency 10 Hard disk latenxy

1 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

Slide based on lectur from Prof. R. Burns (Baltimore)

Amdahls Law
Amdahls Law is used to calculate system speed-up if only parts of the system becomes faster Heavily used in parallel compu?ng Generalized Amdahls Law calculates speed-up S based on 1 S= P k , n 1

k =0

where

S k

Pk Time frac?on for group Sk Speed-up (or slow-down) of group n number of groups

Example for Amdahls Law

Assump?ons:
12% of a program can be arbitraily accelerated 88% of the program stay

Ques?on: What is the speed-up?

S= 1 0,12 0,88 + 1 = 1,136

Inuence of I/O Performance

100 90
Relative Ausfhrungsdauer

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1996 1997 1998 Jahr Zeit IO Zeit CPU 1999 2000

Assump?on: CPU increases 100 %/year, I/O latency decreases by 8% / year Speed-up decreases from 29%/year (1996 1997) to 14%/year (1999 2000)

Slide based on lectures from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley) and Prof. R. Burns (Baltimore)

Inuence of I/O Performance

100 90

Relative Ausfhrungsdauer

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1996 1997 1998 Jahr Zeit IO Zeit CPU 1999 2000

Exponen?al performance increase can change cri?cal component Speed-up decreases from 46%/year (1996 1997) to 33%/year (1999 2000)

Slide based on lectures from Prof. D. Patterson (Berkeley) and Prof. R. Burns (Baltimore)