Carl Lowenstein on Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 10:39:21AM -0800: > On Nov 29, 2007 11:21 PM, Andrew Lentvorski wrote: > > Wade Curry wrote: > > > > > I've heard that solid state drives were the rage in the past, > > > in the mainframe shop I was in at least. But in the end they > > > ditched it because it wasn't nearly as reliable as the SCSI > > > disk packs they had been using. > > > > Really? When? Were those just RAM with batteries? I don't > > ever recall flash even being remotely in the running until this > > year. > > > > > Any remarks about the reliability? At this point I don't see > > > it as a particularly attractive feature quite aside from the > > > astronomical price. > > My feeling for "in the past" for solid-state drives places them > about 15 to 20 years ago. DEC had some that were basically RAM > arrays with a battery backup. I think the price was about $50k > for a 32MB unit. You really had to want the low latency access.
Bingo. I wasn't working there at that time so I don't have personal recollections of them. All of the disk drives on those systems are connected externally, though. Latency was a big concern. Wade Curry syntaxman -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
