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)

Processor

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

Data Path

Main Memory

Control

Input
Disk

Output

Photo of Disk Head, Arm, Actuator

Spindle"
Arm"

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

Actuator"

Head"

Platters (12)"

Disk Device Terminology

Arm!

Head!

Actuator!

Sector!

Inner! Outer!
Track! Track!
Platter!

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

Areal density:

Higher TPI and BPI allow smaller diameter at same capacity

Smaller disk diameter enable lighter disk arm

Higher accelera?on and smaller distances lead to smaller

seek ?mes

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

Hieraus kann die folgende Formel gebildet werden:

n 1

Seek =

i (n i )
i =1

n 1

i
i =1

n 1

(n-1) mal

(n 1) n (2n 1)
6
= n in=11 = n
=1 n
3
(n 1) n
i

2
i =1

Hilfsmilel Average Seek Time

Es gilt fr die folgenden Reihen:
n

i =
i =1

i2 =
i =1

n (n + 1)
2

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
Zeit propor?onal zur Wurzel des En~ernung plus der Selle-Zeit

Bei langen Seeks bewegt sich der Festplalenarm hauptschlich mit

konstanter Geschwindigkeit
Zeit propor?onal zur En~ernung plus einem Overhead

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

BPI (Bits per Inch) on outer track smaller than on inner track

Technology enables par??oning of disks into zones

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

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

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

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

Normalized relative to 1990

Network
Memory bandwidth
Hard disk bandwidth
Network latency
Hard disk latenxy

10

1
1990

1992

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

1994

1996

1998

2000

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=
n 1 P k ,

where

k =0

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
+

= 1,136

Inuence of I/O Performance

100

Relative Ausfhrungsdauer

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Jahr
Zeit IO

Zeit CPU

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

Relative Ausfhrungsdauer

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Jahr
Zeit IO

Zeit CPU

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)