Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830

Disk Storage Systems

CSCE430/830 Computer Architecture
Lecturer: Prof. Hong Jiang
Courtesy of Yifeng Zhu (U. Maine)
Fall, 2006
Portions of these slides are derived from:
Dave Patterson UCB
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
I/O Systems
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Motivation: Who Cares About I/O?
CPU Performance: 50% to 100% per year
I/O system performance limited by mechanical delays
< 5% per year (IO per sec or MB per sec)
Amdahl's Law: system speed-up limited by the
slowest part!
10% IO & 10x CPU 5x Performance (lose 50%)
10% IO & 100x CPU 10x Performance (lose 90%)
I/O bottleneck:
Diminishing fraction of time in CPU
Diminishing value of faster CPUs
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Today: Processing power doubles every 18 months

Today: Memory size doubles every 18 months (4X/3 yrs)

Today: Disk capacity doubles every 18 months

Disk positioning rate (seek + rotate) doubles every ten years!
Technology Trends
The I/O
GAP

Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Storage Technology Drivers
Driven by the prevailing computing paradigm
1950s: migration from batch to on-line processing
1990s: migration to ubiquitous computing
computers in phones, books, cars, video
cameras,
nationwide fiber optical network with wireless
tails
Effects on storage industry:
Embedded storage
smaller, cheaper, more reliable, lower power
Data utilities
high capacity, hierarchically managed storage
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Historical Perspective
1956 IBM Ramac early 1970s Winchester
Developed for mainframe computers, proprietary interfaces
Steady shrink in form factor: 27 in. to 14 in.
1970s developments
5.25-inch floppy disk formfactor
early emergence of industry standard disk interfaces
ST506, SASI, SMD, ESDI
Early 1980s
PCs and first generation workstations
Mid 1980s
Client/server computing
Centralized storage on file server
accelerates disk downsizing: 8 inch to 5.25 inch
Mass market disk drives become a reality
industry standards: SCSI, IDE
5.25-inch drives for standalone PCs, end of proprietary interfaces
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk History
Data
density
Mbit/sq. in.
Capacity of
Unit Shown
Megabytes
1973:
1. 7 Mbit/sq. in
140 MBytes
1979:
7. 7 Mbit/sq. in
2,300 MBytes
Source: New York Times, 2/23/98, page C3,
Makers of disk drives crowd even more data into even smaller spaces
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk History
1989:
63 Mbit/sq. in
60,000 MBytes
1997:
1450 Mbit/sq. in
2300 MBytes
Source: New York Times, 2/23/98, page C3,
Makers of disk drives crowd even more data into even smaller spaces
1997:
3090 Mbit/sq. in
8100 MBytes
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
1 inch disk drive!
2000 IBM MicroDrive:
1.7 x 1.4 x 0.2
1 GB, 3600 RPM,
5 MB/s, 15 ms seek
Digital camera, PalmPC?
2006 MicroDrive?
9 GB, 50 MB/s!
Assuming it finds a niche
in a successful product
Assuming past trends continue
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk Trends
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk Trends
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk Trends
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk Trends
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Devices: Magnetic Disks
Purpose:
Long-term, nonvolatile storage
Large, inexpensive, slow level in
the storage hierarchy
Characteristics:
Seek Time (~ 8 ms avg)
positional latency
rotational latency
Transfer rate
About a sector per ms (5-15 MB/s)
Blocks
Capacity
Gigabytes
Quadruples every 3 years

7200 RPM = 120 RPS 8 ms per rev
avg. rot. latency = 4 ms
128 sectors per track 0.0625 ms per sector
1 KB per sector 16 MB / s

Response time
= Queue + Controller + Seek + Rot + Transfer
Service time
Sector
Track
Cylinder
Head
Platter
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Devices: Magnetic Disks
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Devices: Magnetic Disks
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Photo of Disk Head, Arm, Actuator
Actuator
Arm
Head
Platters (12)
Spindle
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Devices: Magnetic Disks
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk Device Terminology
Several platters, with information recorded magnetically on both
surfaces (usually)
Actuator moves head (end of arm,1/surface) over track (seek), select
surface, wait for sector rotate under head, then read or write
Cylinder: all tracks under heads
Bits recorded in tracks, which in turn divided into sectors (e.g., 512
Bytes)
Platter
Outer
Track
Inner
Track
Sector
Actuator
Head Arm
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk Device Terminology
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk Device Performance
Platter
Arm
Actuator
Head Sector
Inner
Track
Outer
Track
Disk Latency = Seek Time + Rotation Time + Transfer
Time + Controller Overhead
Seek Time? depends no. tracks move arm, seek speed of disk
Rotation Time? depends on speed disk rotates, how far sector is
from head
Transfer Time? depends on data rate (bandwidth) of disk (bit
density), size of request
Controller
Spindle
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk Device Terminology
Disk Latency = Queuing Time + Controller Time + Seek Time
+ Rotation Time + Transfer Time

Order-of-magnitude times for 4K byte transfers:
Seek: 8 ms or less
Rotate: 4.2 ms @ 7200 rpm
Transfer: 1 ms @ 7200 rpm
Platter
Outer Track
Inner Track
Sector
Head
Arm
Actuator
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Tape vs. Disk
Longitudinal tape uses same technology as hard disk;
tracks its density improvements
Disk head flies above surface, tape head lies on
surface
Inherent cost-performance based on geometries:
fixed rotating platters with gaps
(random access, limited area, 1 media / reader)
vs.
removable long strips wound on spool
(sequential access, "unlimited" length, multiple /
reader)
New technology trend:
Helical Scan (VCR, Camcorder, DAT)
Spins head at angle to tape to improve density
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
R-DAT Technology
90 Wrap Angle
Drum
Direction
of
Tape
Track
Rotary Drum
Four Head Recording

Tracks Recorded 20 w/o guard band

Read After Write Verify
Helical Recording Scheme
2000 RPM
R
R
W
W
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
Disk I/O Performance
Response time = Queue + Device Service time
Proc
Queue
IOC Device
Metrics:
Response Time
Throughput
Disk Storage Systems CSCE430/830
The following shows two potential ways of numbering the sectors of
data on a disk (only two tracks are shown and each track has eight
sectors). Assuming that typical reads are contiguous (e.g., all 16
sectors are read in order), which way of numbering the sectors will be
likely to result in higher performance? Why?
Cylinder and Head Skew
13
0
2
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
11
0
2
1
3
4
5
6
7
14
15
8
9
10
12
13