PDA

View Full Version : Fusion drive for PPC machines




PowerPCMacMan
Nov 2, 2012, 04:24 PM
Everyone,

Lets try and chip in some ideas how we can get an equivalent form of fusion drive for our aging, but performing PowerPC machines. The thought just came across my mind.

Anyone with ideas on how to achieve this?



GimmeSlack12
Nov 2, 2012, 04:28 PM
You can't install an SSD on a PowerPC (No SATA on PowerPC). So not really sure what the point would be.

Otherwise you could just RAID 0 some IDE drives to sum all of the storage together.

Ariii
Nov 2, 2012, 04:29 PM
You can't install an SSD on a PowerPC (No SATA on PowerPC). So not really sure what the point would be.

Otherwise you could just RAID 0 some IDE drives to sum all of the storage together.

They make PATA SSD's.

GimmeSlack12
Nov 2, 2012, 04:35 PM
They make PATA SSD's.

This is true, but I thought they were throttled or bottlenecked by the IDE controller. Can't imagine it being worth the price.

Intell
Nov 2, 2012, 04:39 PM
This is true, but I thought they were throttled or bottlenecked by the IDE controller. Can't imagine it being worth the price.

They are very worth the price. While they can't be used to the SSD's full speed, they are much faster than even the fastest PATA HDDs. The biggest gain comes in random read/writes of small files.

GimmeSlack12
Nov 2, 2012, 04:55 PM
They are very worth the price. While they can't be used to the SSD's full speed, they are much faster than even the fastest PATA HDDs. The biggest gain comes in random read/writes of small files.

Fair enough then. Not sure how a Fusion Drive can be used on a PowerPC though (at least the official Apple version). PowerPC's only run up to 10.5 last I checked.

Intell
Nov 2, 2012, 05:09 PM
Why don't you emulate a Fusion drive? Get a hard drive and a small SSD. Install Mac OS X on the SSD. Make a shell script that runs once a day/week at 2:00AM to do the following: Log out of the current user, get a list of all open files for blacklisting, copy files from the SSD to the HDD into the same directory structure that haven't been touched within X amount of days, delete the SSD copy, make a symlink to the old location on the SSD, if the HDD copy has been touched within the X amount of days, put it back on the SSD.

There will be some limits to this approach. It will have to be done when all users logged out to prevent data corruption. It must have a blacklist that includes the core OS files. It must be done as root to preserve the file permissions and have access to everything. The hard drive's directory must not be altered, better yet the hard drive should be mounted so that it is hidden to Finder. The script must not move files that are currently open. Spotlight may have to problems with this setup.

Hrududu
Nov 2, 2012, 05:51 PM
You can't install an SSD on a PowerPC (No SATA on PowerPC). So not really sure what the point would be.

Otherwise you could just RAID 0 some IDE drives to sum all of the storage together.
No SATA on PowerPC???? Explain the iMac and PowerMac G5s.

jbarley
Nov 2, 2012, 06:46 PM
You can't install an SSD on a PowerPC (No SATA on PowerPC). So not really sure what the point would be.

Otherwise you could just RAID 0 some IDE drives to sum all of the storage together.
Please do not tell this to my G4 Cube running off an OWC mercury SSD, or my G5 powermac using the same type of SSD.

bteam
Nov 2, 2012, 07:04 PM
I found some cheap optibays for my powerbook G4, early 2005. I bought one this week from Hong Kong on Ebay. Do a search using "ide to sata 12.7." 12.7 meaning the height of the DVD drive in mm. I measured the one in mine and it's about 12-13 mm. One of the listings indicates it supports Powerbooks and ibooks, but the pictures indicate that some are identical, so of those choose the cheapest one.

I plan on sticking in a SATA SSD and will report back if it works or fails. Obviously you will lose the DVD drive which isn't a big deal for me since mine is dead. Also, you will need to boot from USB to install OS X.

So yes, it seems like getting a SATA SSD is possible.

Nameci
Nov 2, 2012, 09:58 PM
You can't install an SSD on a PowerPC (No SATA on PowerPC). So not really sure what the point would be.

Otherwise you could just RAID 0 some IDE drives to sum all of the storage together.

I am sorry but all of my Powermac G5's do have SATA SSD drive for boot.

orestes1984
Nov 2, 2012, 10:55 PM
You can't install an SSD on a PowerPC (No SATA on PowerPC).

I'm sorry What? I mustn't have a SATA attached SSD boot drive in my G5 Xserve, it must not exist :eek: That's a complete and utter furphy.

I am actually 100% certain that this could be done given that its just a formatting trick to see an SSD and a HDD as one logical drive. This actually sounds like JBOD as one logical drive.

I do not know how to do it, but I'm sure with the right kind of formatting tricks you could do it. Maybe not with an APM partition table, but definitely with a GUID partition map and PPC Macs already recognise GUID, they just can't boot from it.

I would almost eat a hat if a PPC Mac could not recognise a fusion drive out of its box, but that's a wait and see until someone else tries it first.

G51989
Nov 3, 2012, 01:30 AM
You can't install an SSD on a PowerPC (No SATA on PowerPC). So not really sure what the point would be.

.

Wrong, iMac G5's, Powermac G5s and XServes all supports SATA 1

But an Apple fusion drive it pointless, it needs 10.8 to work.

orestes1984
Nov 3, 2012, 02:27 AM
It needs 10.8 to work.

It's a formatting trick that I'd bet my left nut could be replicated without 10.8.

Michael Anthony
Nov 3, 2012, 02:46 AM
You can't install an SSD on a PowerPC (No SATA on PowerPC). So not really sure what the point would be.

Otherwise you could just RAID 0 some IDE drives to sum all of the storage together.
Epic fail here, sir.

I've got a G5 tower, adding a 240GB OWC Electra 3G SSD as a boot drive has made me cry tears of joy every time I reach for my keyboard.

orestes1984
Nov 3, 2012, 03:19 AM
Epic fail here, sir.

I've got a G5 tower, adding a 240GB OWC Electra 3G SSD as a boot drive has made me cry tears of joy every time I reach for my keyboard.

Got G5 that boots in less than 40 seconds to the desktop? I do...

Intell
Nov 3, 2012, 07:13 AM
I am actually 100% certain that this could be done given that its just a formatting trick to see an SSD and a HDD as one logical drive. This actually sounds like JBOD as one logical drive.

I do not know how to do it, but I'm sure with the right kind of formatting tricks you could do it. Maybe not with an APM partition table, but definitely with a GUID partition map and PPC Macs already recognise GUID, they just can't boot from it.

I would almost eat a hat if a PPC Mac could not recognise a fusion drive out of its box, but that's a wait and see until someone else tries it first.

It isn't a JBOD or a RAID. Those are dumb arrays that can't move the recently used data to the SSD drive. A Fusion drive does. It uses CPU cycles to determine where the data belongs and it moves it, likely using the kernel process to do it. No formatting is able to achieve this because formatting isn't smart enough to move the data between the two drives depending on its use. While a RAID theoretically could be configured to do, no standard within the RAID spec outlines it. You better start looking for a small hat to eat because no Mac running anything older than 10.8.2 will be able to see the Fusion drive as a mountable drive. They'll see it as two unformatted or corrupted drives.

It's a formatting trick that I'd bet my left nut could be replicated without 10.8.

It isn't a formatting trick. See my response above and schedule an appointment at your local hospital.

Got G5 that boots in less than 40 seconds to the desktop? I do...

I do as well. And its boot drive is a WD Green drive. I don't know why people say those drives are so bad.

GimmeSlack12
Nov 3, 2012, 11:03 AM
Fair enough then. Not sure how a Fusion Drive can be used on a PowerPC though (at least the official Apple version). PowerPC's only run up to 10.5 last I checked.

Yeah I get it guys, there is SATA in some PowerPC's. But I've already been corrected on that.

Regardless, you can't run 10.8 on a PowerPC.

PowerPCMacMan
Nov 3, 2012, 03:54 PM
Obviously, it can't be done though I believe with combined effort it CAN be done. We in the PowerPC community have to help each other out, come on, guys! We can do it!!

IntellMR already outlined the framework for a fusion like drive under PowerPC.

Cox Orange
Nov 3, 2012, 07:58 PM
Though not actually what is discussed here, but while I was searching for another Applications, I stumbled upon those two (to make a RAM-Disk):
http://mac.majorgeeks.com/files/details/iramdisk.html
http://mac.majorgeeks.com/files/details/make_ram_disk.html

Other thing I was thinking: Isn't there a Drive from Seagate that has a flash chip as Cache-Buffer in a normal hard drive disk?

Originally posted by bteam
I found some cheap optibays for my powerbook G4, early 2005. (...)
which would be the slower of the two IDE controllers (slower on the optical drive). One could also just use SATA-to-IDE-Adapter (there are slim ones for Laptops, though I do not see them in big numbers on Ebay).

For IDE desktop Macs, SATA can also be achieved through SATA-PCI-Controllers (not sure about the actual transfer rates with overhead and all this stuff over PCI).


I do as well. And its boot drive is a WD Green drive. I don't know why people say those drives are so bad.
First bad image people have of it belongs to reliability, which comes from the first days, it was new, when there was a certain production series failing a lot, I guess.
I wonder, too. I did not test them, but I wondered, because they often are used in mediaplayers and such, but I had a 2,5" 5400rpm Drive hooked to my mediaplayer (part of a satelite Receiver) and it would start to stutter (an older 7200rpm SATA drive I had spare then did the job), so I asked myself, why then are Caviar Green Drives pictured as very slow? I searched a bit and got the impression that though they work for mediaplayers, people get frustrated using them as Drive for "media" editing, making a connection in their mind like "use in mediaplayer -> photos and films are media -> Drive for mediaediting".
I would really like to test them once out of curiosity, but I guess like with most hard drives I do not see a real difference in real life use (or I will think it is my old Mac, when something slows down). The cases were I (myself) can really see, that a drive is slow are few (I am not doing intensive stuff). Using Xbench, just to know the numbers, would be interesting, if Xbench wouldn't produce phantasy speedvalues (I saw this, testing the same drive over and over again. Just not comparable).

G51989
Nov 4, 2012, 01:42 AM
It's a formatting trick that I'd bet my left nut could be replicated without 10.8.

Its much more than a formatting trick, its how OSX 10.8 handles the files on the drive ( Windows 8 Pro can do it on hybrid drives as well ), its a matter of software.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 01:52 AM
It's two physical drives seen as one logical drive, aka JBOD spanning. As for moving files between the two drives. With a little work and some software it could be achieved pretty simply, at worst you could schedule files to be moved using cron scheduling, at best you would work out how to implement it on the fly.

Michael Anthony
Nov 4, 2012, 04:51 AM
Eh I still like to do my own thing with SSD + mechanical, that way if a drive fails I can actually diagnose what's wrong and fix or replace it.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 05:04 AM
Eh I still like to do my own thing with SSD + mechanical, that way if a drive fails I can actually diagnose what's wrong and fix or replace it.

I do agree, that's one of the worst things about these Fusion drives and something that goes against every grain of IT logic and common sense in having 2 points of failure.

It's too early for it to raise its head yet but there will be massive issues with a lot of angry calls to Apple Care and a lot of geniuses who are going to cop the flack when peoples fusion drives start failing in the way a striped set does without a parity drive.

Fusion is actually a worse solution than straight out striping of a drive and it's a PR disaster waiting to happen.

SuperJudge
Nov 4, 2012, 08:45 AM
It's two physical drives seen as one logical drive, aka JBOD spanning. As for moving files between the two drives. With a little work and some software it could be achieved pretty simply, at worst you could schedule files to be moved using cron scheduling, at best you would work out how to implement it on the fly.

I can actually already think of ways to do it easily, with two separate drives and a simple script loaded into launchd. Fusion has to be more sophisticated than just JBOD though. Not much more mind you, but more. My guess is that they implemented something like lvm. At least I hope they did, because as you note it's actually appreciably worse than striping and represents two potential points of failure.

Additionally, the processing overhead for this kind of thing would be enormous and the disk activity would in all certainty be crippling for most machines. Anything less than a quad G5 and you'd probably slow your PowerPC machine to a crawl. This is also definitely not a Pro feature. If you're working with large files, I don't see this being of much benefit since that's not where SSD tech shines.

In short, I'd certainly be uncomfortable with a Fusion drive in my machine. I'll stick to a more mundane implementation of the combination of SSDs and spinning rust for the foreseeable future.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 09:38 AM
I'd certainly be uncomfortable with a Fusion drive in my machine. I'll stick to a more mundane implementation of the combination of SSDs and spinning rust for the foreseeable future.

I hope its some sort of better managed logical volume, but I don't understand it fully. What it does do is go against every grain of what I know not to do and I think we can all agree on the increased risk of failure.

bteam
Nov 4, 2012, 12:53 PM
which would be the slower of the two IDE controllers (slower on the optical drive). One could also just use SATA-to-IDE-Adapter (there are slim ones for Laptops, though I do not see them in big numbers on Ebay).

Arrgh. You are right. Only 16.7 MBps. I could live with 66 or even 33 MBps, but it's slower than USB 2.0 And it doesn't even use DMA! PIO mode only. I guess I'll have to cancel my order and stick my spare SATA disk in there.

GermanyChris
Nov 4, 2012, 12:59 PM
Why is we think a fusion drive is good? I like controlling what goes where.

jbarley
Nov 4, 2012, 01:18 PM
Why is we think a fusion drive is good? I like controlling what goes where.
Do you have a secret on how you "control" what goes where on your HDD?
If so, would you consider sharing it?

GermanyChris
Nov 4, 2012, 01:27 PM
being that fusion is 2 drives it think it's pretty easy..

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 01:29 PM
It's two physical drives seen as one logical drive, aka JBOD spanning. As for moving files between the two drives. With a little work and some software it could be achieved pretty simply, at worst you could schedule files to be moved using cron scheduling, at best you would work out how to implement it on the fly.

It's much more than that. While RAID 0 technology may have been a starting point, it is nowhere close to a Fusion drive. RAID 0 cannot dynamically move recently used data between two drives. Fusion drives can and do. RAID 0 drives are rather dumb. Fusion drives are smart in that the move the data without any outside help except the the mach_kernel.

jbarley
Nov 4, 2012, 01:50 PM
Then there is always the possibility that as soon as someone figures out how to "roll their own" Apple will probably sue them for patent infringement.:(

SuperJudge
Nov 4, 2012, 01:54 PM
Then there is always the possibility that as soon as someone figures out how to "roll their own" Apple will probably sue them for patent infringement.:(

Dubious. Unless the implementation works the same way and Apple has a patent on that process, I wouldn't count on it.

However, I'd say the problem is more in the implementation at all. How can this be done without both massive performance issues and massive data integrity issues? I have some ideas, but I still don't know if this is a good idea unless it's working with some sort of abstraction layer that is still aware of the kind of underlying storage. How intelligent is the process? I'm holding out to see some better information than what's out there currently.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 07:52 PM
It's much more than that. While RAID 0 technology may have been a starting point, it is nowhere close to a Fusion drive. RAID 0 cannot dynamically move recently used data between two drives. Fusion drives can and do. RAID 0 drives are rather dumb. Fusion drives are smart in that the move the data without any outside help except the the mach_kernel.

I did not say anything about RAID 0 and thats not what JBOD spanning is. JBOD spanning is taking a number of different sized physical drives and making one logical drive out of it. This is what is going on in the most basic sense with Fusion, although one would want to hope that Apple has actually come up with some sort of better logical volume management than this.

You completely missed the point of this discussion, for whatever reason and even if we take it as a fact that Fusion is "smart" I could write a fairly rudimentary Cron script so as my JBOD array seemed pretty smart as well and moved your less frequently used files to a point on the array where they were on the platter disk rather than the SSD.

You're treating this like it's rocket surgery and that somehow the devs at Apple are geniuses, when the term genius and Apple does not belong in the same sentence from a lot of my own personal experiences.

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 08:35 PM
A Fusion drive isn't a JBOD, it's what Apple calls a "Concatenated Disk Set". A "Concatenated Disk Set" is derived from the RAID design with a few tweaks of their own. The "Concatenated Disk Set" has existed since 10.4. Apple has solved some rather big problems like permissions, open files, data integrity, and duplicate data on the drive. You're treating this like it's something simple. If it was so simple then it would have been done ages ago on another *NIX system.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 08:39 PM
A Fusion drive isn't a JBOD, it's what Apple calls a "Concatenated Disk Set". A "Concatenated Disk Set" is derived from the RAID design with a few tweaks of their own. The "Concatenated Disk Set" has existed since 10.4. Apple has solved some rather big problems like permissions, open files, data integrity, and duplicate data on the drive. You're treating this like it's something simple. If it was so simple then it would have been done ages ago on another *NIX system.

It IS something rather simple, there are far too many people on this forum that treat Apple like God... Irony is what happened with the poisoned Apple if you ever read your scripture.

pdjudd
Nov 4, 2012, 08:39 PM
Then there is always the possibility that as soon as someone figures out how to "roll their own" Apple will probably sue them for patent infringement.:(

Unless you can point to the patent in question, we can't assume that Apple will do anything. Everything that I have read on this suggests that this technology isn't unique enough to warrant a patent.

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 08:47 PM
It IS something rather simple, there are far too many people on this forum that treat Apple like God... Irony is what happened with the poisoned Apple if you ever read your scripture.

When you say scripture I'm assuming you're talking about the Cristian bible. In the original Hebrew texts upon which the old testament was written from, there are no mentions of apple anywhere within the text. This is likely because apples simply did not exist with that geographical area at that time.

I do not treat Apple as a god of any kind. It is a corporation and corporations can and often do wrong. Once again, if it was so simple then why hasn't it been done ages ago on another *NIX system. UNIX has been around longer than Apple. Why hasn't the Fusion drive technology never arrived then? Why is it not a grand marketing point of Ubuntu or Android?

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 08:50 PM
If there is enough interest, itwill be rolled into every other *nix distro, it may even be rolled into Windows. The only thing I can see that is patentable is the name Fusion. Apple haven't even been particularly lazy about this, there is no fusion going on in a physical sense, Seagate do that with the Momentus XT with mixed reviews. For Apple it is a formatting trick.

pdjudd
Nov 4, 2012, 08:55 PM
It IS something rather simple, there are far too many people on this forum that treat Apple like God... Irony is what happened with the poisoned Apple if you ever read your scripture.
Unless you have proof that Intell is one of these people (which it doesn't sound like he is - in fact his arguments sound rather logical) than making ad hominem attacks isn't very wise and are not helping your case.

What is your proof that Fusion Drive is similar to JBOD as you assert? What basis is this based off of and if it were so simple, why hasn't it shown up elsewhere in UNIX systems?


The only thing I can see that is patentable is the name Fusion.

You can't patent a name, only a process. You are thinking of a trademark which can be copy written.

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 09:04 PM
The distro maintainer isn't necessarily the one that would have to make this. If the simplicity of it is so great, why has Mr. John Doe not made something like this in his free time and post it to a WordPress blog yet? The "Fusion Drive" name would be trademarkable, not patentable. The "process of determining and relocating recently used data" would and is something that is patentable if Apple could word it correctly with the proper example.

This isn't a trick of formatting. The drive's format does not possess the needed abilities to carry out the process of determining and relocating recently used data. The OS is what does that. Apple is likely formatting the drive in such a way so that non-Fusion drive OS' cannot disturb the data on the drives. Just like how the Apple TV 1's internal hard drive was HFS+ formatted, but used a different header to prevent stock Mac OS X from mounting it. Fusion drives need at least one SSD connected to a SATA port to be able to access the drive's SMART status to determine that it is a SSD. That requirement alone shows that the formatting of the drive is irrelevant and that the OS needs to know which drive is the SSD.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 09:12 PM
blah blah blah... snip snip snip... etc... etc... etc... The thing with Apple is that they are very good at spotting a niche market segment and making something happen. People LIKE solid state drives but for various reasons they want more capacity and production costs of high cap SSDs at this stage are still too expensive. Hybrid drives are good, people like them too, but they're still not SSD fast.

Apple brought to common market a standard, whatever that was we don't agree about, but that's kind of not the point. It was however that, that was already out there made user friendly with a buzz word "Fusion" because no else had just like the iMac, the iPod, the iPhone etc. If it succeeds we will see countless other "Fusion" drives out there if it fails to gain market traction like Thunderbolt then it will largely disappear from the mainstream market like the largely ignored niche market Firewire. I've already pointed to the biggest issue with logical volumes or whatever else you want to call them and it IS multiple points of failure, how Apple goes about protecting users against this is yet to be seen.

But the hair brained genius and probably the reason why no one else has done this is in the fact that it doesn't make sense in terms of data security and retention using traditional common sense when it comes to disk drives.

----------

This isn't a trick of formatting. The drive's format does not possess the needed abilities to carry out the process of determining and relocating recently used data.D.

All drives have this to some degree or another, it's what we call in layman terminology, a cache it just so happens that Seagate has a rather large one on their Momentus XT drives that does what Fusion does by moving commonly accessed files onto the "SSD"... What Apple has done here is most definitely not a party trick. Cache is what Fusion is more correctly, it's high speed fused memory to the circuit board of the hard drive for almost instantaneous access to recently used files. You are talking that which is almost as old as hard drives themselves technologically... In essence what apple has created is a large "cache" out of an SSD drive.

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 09:24 PM
Apple brought to market standard that's already out there that can determine and relocate recently used data? The only thing that's close to a Fusion drive is a hardware implementation made by Intel that came out within the last few years and is a part of their Sandy/Ivy Bridge chipset. Nothing else exists. Nothing.

People like hybrid drives? The only hybrid drive out is Seagate's XT series. Based on your own statements, it got mixed reviews. I don't see how that equates to people liking it. Most of those poor reviews are from people with Macs. Those reviews may have even turned people away from Seagate's second generation XT drives just like the early reviews turned people away from WD's Green drives or Hitachi's DeskStar drives.

Thunderbolt and FireWire have gotten considerable traction in the professional media market. If you think they haven't, you may want to think about your current profession and its budget. And in the days before USB 2, FireWire was the only thing for fast and easy data transfer and external storage.

A hard drive's cache is not a SSD. Nor is the XT's cache the SSD. A hard drive's cache is much faster than a SSD and is roughly equivalent to a ram chip on the hard drive. These caches typically don't exceed 64 megebytes. Its job is to buffer the read/write operations. So that the slower drive can locate and read or write the data as the system continues to request operations to be done. Hard drives have had this cache since the late 1980's. The XT's hybrid functionality is done through its firmware, not its formatting. If it really was two drives made one via a logical system, then you would be able to access the 500GB HDD and the 4/8GB SSD separately from the OS.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 09:30 PM
Apple brought to market standard that's already out there that can determine and relocate recently used data? The only thing that's close to a Fusion drive is a hardware implementation made by Intel that came out within the last few years and is a part of their Sandy/Ivy Bridge chipset. Nothing else exists. Nothing.

This is wrong, logical volumes are as old as the hills as well, the only trick going on is how the files are being moved. But as I have stated this is a VERY rudimentary process.

People like hybrid drives?

Yes, in fact I am running one in my Mac right now and have had ZERO problems with it, most of the problems encountered are end user problems that can be resolved with firmware updates from Seagate. It's what we like to call PEBCAC or id10t errors.

The only hybrid drive out is Seagate's XT series.

And it does reasonably well enough for Seagate to see a reason to continue marketing it.

Thunderbolt and FireWire have gotten considerable traction in the professional media market. If you think they haven't, you may want to think about your current profession and its budget. And in the days before USB 2, FireWire was the only thing for fast and easy data transfer and external storage.

None of these are mainstream markets... you missed the point, the point is gone, where it is I don't know but whence after it flew over your head BAZINGA!

throAU
Nov 4, 2012, 09:32 PM
Pop in a fibre channel HBA and connect to an EMC or Netapp with tiered storage.


edit:
And fusion is exactly a JBOD, with some smarts to know what disks in it are faster than others. The file (block, actually) moving around stuff is likely just an extension of the code apple has had for years for on the fly defrag when files are opened and closed.

The clever bit was having the insight to make the relevant bits of code talk to each other with a little bit of brains to glue it together.

The tech/theory behind it isn't rocket science. The initiative to actually do it is inspired, though.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 09:37 PM
The initiative to actually do it is inspired, though.

This is something I wont argue about, but that is Apple for you in a nut shell.

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 09:43 PM
This is wrong, logical volumes are as old as the hills as well, the only trick going on is how the files are being moved. But as I have stated this is a VERY rudimentary process.

And it does reasonably well enough for Seagate to see a reason to continue marketing it.

None of these are mainstream markets... you missed the point.

While logical drives have been around since the early 1970's, they haven't had the ability to dynamically identify and relocate user's recently used data to faster hard drives. This is what Apple has done. They are likely one of the first companies to do such a thing as well.

People must not like XT drives enough for WD to see it as a potential market. The point wasn't missed by me. I'm only pointing out the flaws in your arguments. I suggest looking at the larger picture and not limited your views based on what you have. Thousands, if not millions, of end users have bought a digital movie camera from the late 1990's to the late 2000's that use FireWire/iLink. These end users then used this protocol to edit and save their movies. If it wasn't for FireWire's mainstream ubiquity, these devices would not have existed in the form they did and that market would have never taken off. These digital movie cameras brought FireWire mainsteam. It's very likely that they are still used everyday by many people as well.

A hard drive's cache is not a SSD. Nor is the XT's cache the SSD. A hard drive's cache is much faster than a SSD and is roughly equivalent to a ram chip on the hard drive. These caches typically don't exceed 64 megebytes. Its job is to buffer the read/write operations. So that the slower drive can locate and read or write the data as the system continues to request operations to be done. Hard drives have had this cache since the late 1980's. The XT's hybrid functionality is done through its firmware, not its formatting. If it really was two drives made one via a logical system, then you would be able to access the 500GB HDD and the 4/8GB SSD separately from the OS.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 09:52 PM
I am not arguing that the Momentus XT is a logical drive, it's clearly something else. I am stating it is a HDD with a small fused SSD on the circuit board for the hard disk drive. I am stating that this is a fusion of two technologies at a hardware level where Apples Fusion drive does this ipso post facto at a rudimentary software level.

People must not like XT drives enough for WD to see it as a potential market.

Yet Samsung have, and Seagate continues to increase its range of Hybrid drives, these things are incredibly strange whence we begin to insert our own opinion based on bad personal experiences and put our feet in our own mouths :rolleyes:

. I suggest looking at the larger picture and not limited your views based on what you have. Thousands, if not millions, of end users have bought a digital movie camera from the late 1990's to the late 2000's that use FireWire/iLink.

I suggest you do the same then look at just how many motherboards actually had an Apple Firewire, or Sony iLink port, or if they did/do how many of them have more than one :rolleyes: Firewire is a niche market as it always has been that never cracked the mainstream market in the way USB did and continues to do.

throAU
Nov 4, 2012, 09:56 PM
You completely missed the point of this discussion, for whatever reason and even if we take it as a fact that Fusion is "smart" I could write a fairly rudimentary Cron script so as my JBOD array seemed pretty smart as well and moved your less frequently used files to a point on the array where they were on the platter disk rather than the SSD.

You're treating this like it's rocket surgery and that somehow the devs at Apple are geniuses, when the term genius and Apple does not belong in the same sentence from a lot of my own personal experiences.

Except fusion works on a bock level in real time, not overnight or scheduled like your cron script.


And no, as I said above the little bits of tech aren't rocket science. Joining them together in a consumer device however is something no one else has done before, and apple coming up with the idea, and code to do it is what sets them apart.

It's an elegant solution to the problem we all currently face when dealing with HD vs SSD.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 10:02 PM
Except fusion works on a bock level in real time, not overnight or scheduled like your cron script.

Cron was just my very own fly by the pan rudimentary solution I'm sure there's something more elegant going on at an OS or sub OS level allowing all of this to occur.

It's an elegant solution to the problem we all currently face when dealing with HD vs SSD.

Yeah it is, but with one major fault either way you look at it of having two points of failure which is why I would shy away from it until all the cards are on the table as to just how often it does fail. It is an elegant solution I agree though and I'm not contending that it is anything otherwise.

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 10:05 PM
I suggest you do the same then look at just how many motherboards actually had an Apple Firewire, or Sony iLink port, or if they did/do how many of them have more than one. Firewire is a niche market as it always has been that never cracked the mainstream market in the way USB did and continues to do.

Quite a lot. Most OEM's included it on their 2000-2005 desktops. Notably Dell, Sony, IBM/Lenovo, and Gateway. It was more prevalent on their portable computers than their desktops. Intell had a few boards with it as did ASUS. Even cable TV boxes have the option of FireWire.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 10:08 PM
Quite a lot. Most OEM's included it on their 2000-2005 desktops. Notably Dell, Sony, IBM/Lenovo, and Gateway. It was more prevalent on their portable computers than their desktops. Intell had a few boards with it as did ASUS. Even cable TV boxes have the option of FireWire.

Quite a few, but even still if we ask the average home user what Firewire is, the likelihood unless they own a digital video recorder is that they would never have even heard of what Firewire was even if there motherboard had a firewire port on it.

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 10:13 PM
Maybe Dell, Gateway, IBM/Lenovo, and Sony is different in Australia, but IEEE 1394 was on about 60% of their lineups on the first half of the 2000's. Most end users knew and still know what an IEEE 1394 port is. Even if they call it "that strange thing that connects to my microphone/hard drive/cable box/camera". It's well known to many in the US.

throAU
Nov 4, 2012, 10:17 PM
Yeah it is, but with one major fault either way you look at it of having two points of failure which is why I would shy away from it until all the cards are on the table as to just how often it does fail. It is an elegant solution I agree though and I'm not contending that it is anything otherwise.

Well, the alternative is live with slow performance, no space or waste time doing manual data movement yourself.

Given that everyone should have a backup in case of failure/theft/etc anyway, I (and I'm sure apple, as well) see the increased failure rate as an acceptable trade-off.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 10:22 PM
Maybe Dell, Gateway, IBM/Lenovo, and Sony is different in Australia, but IEEE 1394 was on about 60% of their lineups on the first half of the 2000's. Most end users knew and still know what an IEEE 1394 port is. Even if they call it "that strange thing that connects to my microphone/hard drive/cable box/camera". It's well known to many in the US.

I've worked in and around IT for nearly 15 years now, a lot of that time with Windows PCs, plenty of Mac users know Firewire like the back of their hand, however in building PCs I've come to realise I've seen 1 maybe 2 firewire ports on most motherboards. Off the shelf/store bought PCs with propitiatory motherboards manufactured by specific brands, this may be a different case it's nothing I've really dealt with because it's the exception not the norm unless you're working where corporate support is needed that most of these grey box PC suppliers sell complete and utter junk that does the job just well enough to keep their tech support in a job, but not well enough not to frustrate the living daylights out of yourself.

The couple of industries where I've seen firewire come up often is in audio for desks and mixers, video conversion, capture and reccording devices and high speed data transfer where reliability is valued over flash in the pan "bursty" buses like USB.

That said, USB3 and Thunderbolt have gone and changed the game again.

Intell
Nov 4, 2012, 10:27 PM
Here's your problem.

However in building PCs I've come to realise I've seen 1 maybe 2 firewire ports on most motherboards. Off the shelf/store bought PCs with propitiatory motherboards manufactured by specific brands, this may be a different case.

Most consumers do not build their own computer. In the early 2000's they would have gotten a catalog from Dell/HP/IBM/Lenovo/Gateway and looked at their options. They then would have called them up and placed their order along with any BTO options. 60% of those mass production computers had IEEE 1394 built in. When looking at it from this prospective, one could come to the conclusion that non-mainstream was to not have an IEEE 1394 port on one's computer.

orestes1984
Nov 4, 2012, 10:32 PM
Most consumers do not build their own computer.

Of this I'm fairly well aware... On another interesting tidbit we don't have the same regulations here in Australia that cable TV boxes must come with a firewire port if requested.