Mass-Storage System

Chapter 10: Mass-Storage
Systems
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Overview of Mass Storage Structure
 Magnetic disks provide bulk of secondary storage of modern computers
 Drives rotate at 60 to 250 times per second
 Transfer rate is rate at which data flow between drive and computer
 Positioning time (random-access time) is time to move disk arm to desired cylinder (seek time) and
time for desired sector to rotate under the disk head (rotational latency)
 Head crash results from disk head making contact with the disk surface
 That’s bad
 Disks can be removable
 Drive attached to computer via I/O bus
 Busses vary, including EIDE, ATA, SATA, USB, Fibre Channel, SCSI, SAS, Firewire
 Host controller in computer uses bus to talk to disk controller built into drive or storage array
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 10.2 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Moving-head Disk Mechanism
Magnetic Disks
 Platters range from .85” to 14” (historically)
 Commonly 3.5”, 2.5”, and 1.8”
 Range from 30GB to 3TB per drive
 Performance
 Transfer Rate – theoretical – 6 Gb/sec
 Effective Transfer Rate – real – 1Gb/sec
 Seek time from 3ms to 12ms – 9ms common for desktop
drives
 Average seek time measured or calculated based on 1/3 of
tracks
 Latency based on spindle speed
 1 / (RPM / 60) = 60 / RPM
 Average latency = ½ latency
(From Wikipedia)
Magnetic Disk Performance
 Access Latency = Average access time = average seek time + average latency
 For fastest disk 3ms + 2ms = 5ms
 For slow disk 9ms + 5.56ms = 14.56ms
 Average I/O time = average access time + (amount to transfer / transfer rate) + controller overhead
 For example to transfer a 4KB block on a 7200 RPM disk with a 5ms average seek time, 1Gb/sec transfer rate
with a .1ms controller overhead =
 5ms + 4.17ms + 0.1ms + transfer time =
 Transfer time = 4KB / 1Gb/s * 8Gb / GB * 1GB / 10242KB = 32 / (10242) = 0.031 ms
 Average I/O time for 4KB block = 9.27ms + .031ms = 9.301ms
The First Commercial Disk Drive
1956
IBM RAMDAC computer included the IBM
Model 350 disk storage system
5M (7 bit) characters
50 x 24” platters
Access time = < 1 second
Solid-State Disks
 Nonvolatile memory used like a hard drive
 Many technology variations
 Can be more reliable than HDDs
 More expensive per MB
 Maybe have shorter life span
 Less capacity
 But much faster
 Busses can be too slow -> connect directly to PCI for example
 No moving parts, so no seek time or rotational latency
Magnetic Tape
 Was early secondary-storage medium
 Evolved from open spools to cartridges
 Relatively permanent and holds large quantities of data
 Access time slow
 Random access ~1000 times slower than disk
 Mainly used for backup, storage of infrequently-used data, transfer medium between systems
 Kept in spool and wound or rewound past read-write head
 Once data under head, transfer rates comparable to disk
 140MB/sec and greater
 200GB to 1.5TB typical storage
 Common technologies are LTO-{3,4,5} and T10000
Disk Structure
 Disk drives are addressed as large 1-dimensional arrays of logical blocks, where the logical block is the
smallest unit of transfer
 Low-level formatting creates logical blocks on physical media

 The 1-dimensional array of logical blocks is mapped into the sectors of the disk sequentially
 Sector 0 is the first sector of the first track on the outermost cylinder
 Mapping proceeds in order through that track, then the rest of the tracks in that cylinder, and then
through the rest of the cylinders from outermost to innermost
 Logical to physical address should be easy
 Except for bad sectors
 Non-constant # of sectors per track via constant angular velocity
Disk Scheduling
 The operating system is responsible for using hardware efficiently — for the disk drives, this means having
a fast access time and disk bandwidth
 Minimize seek time
 Seek time  seek distance
 Disk bandwidth is the total number of bytes transferred, divided by the total time between the first request
for service and the completion of the last transfer
Disk Scheduling (Cont.)
 There are many sources of disk I/O request
 OS
 System processes
 Users processes
 I/O request includes input or output mode, disk address, memory address, number of sectors to transfer
 OS maintains queue of requests, per disk or device
 Idle disk can immediately work on I/O request, busy disk means work must queue
 Optimization algorithms only make sense when a queue exists
 Note that drive controllers have small buffers and can manage a queue of I/O requests (of varying “depth”)
 Several algorithms exist to schedule the servicing of disk I/O requests

 The analysis is true for one or many platters
 We illustrate scheduling algorithms with a request queue (0-199)
98, 183, 37, 122, 14, 124, 65, 67
Head pointer 53
FCFS
Illustration shows total head movement of 640 cylinders
SSTF
 Shortest Seek Time First selects the request with the minimum seek time from the current head position
 SSTF scheduling is a form of SJF scheduling; may cause starvation of some requests
 Illustration shows total head movement of 236 cylinders
SSTF (Cont.)
SCAN
 The disk arm starts at one end of the disk, and moves toward the other end, servicing requests until it gets
to the other end of the disk, where the head movement is reversed and servicing continues.
 SCAN algorithm Sometimes called the elevator algorithm
 Illustration shows total head movement of 208 cylinders
 But note that if requests are uniformly dense, largest density at other end of disk and those wait the longest
SCAN (Cont.)
C-SCAN
 Provides a more uniform wait time than SCAN
 The head moves from one end of the disk to the other, servicing requests as it goes
 When it reaches the other end, however, it immediately returns to the beginning of the disk, without
servicing any requests on the return trip
 Treats the cylinders as a circular list that wraps around from the last cylinder to the first one
 Total number of cylinders?
C-SCAN (Cont.)
C-LOOK
 LOOK a version of SCAN, C-LOOK a version of C-SCAN
 Arm only goes as far as the last request in each direction, then reverses direction immediately, without
first going all the way to the end of the disk
 Total number of cylinders?
C-LOOK (Cont.)
Selecting a Disk-Scheduling Algorithm
 SSTF is common and has a natural appeal
 SCAN and C-SCAN perform better for systems that place a heavy load on the disk
 Less starvation
 Performance depends on the number and types of requests
 The disk-scheduling algorithm should be written as a separate module of the operating system, allowing
it to be replaced with a different algorithm if necessary
 Either SSTF or LOOK is a reasonable choice for the default algorithm
 What about rotational latency?

 Difficult for OS to calculate
End of Chapter 12
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013

Mass-Storage System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mass-Storage System

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mass-Storage System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 10: Mass-Storage

 Low-level formatting creates logical blocks on physical media

 Minimize seek time

 Seek time  seek distance

 Several algorithms exist to schedule the servicing of disk I/O requests

98, 183, 37, 122, 14, 124, 65, 67

 Illustration shows total head movement of 236 cylinders

 SCAN algorithm Sometimes called the elevator algorithm

 Illustration shows total head movement of 208 cylinders

 Total number of cylinders?

 Total number of cylinders?

 Performance depends on the number and types of requests

 Either SSTF or LOOK is a reasonable choice for the default algorithm

 What about rotational latency?

You might also like