I suppose with that much data capacity they could halve the storage and add redundancy. My question is will it only have 1 reading head? That much data is going to take a very long time to read, unless they're doing multiple layers at a time,
With a rate 1/2 you can't expect to correct more than 5.5% of errors.
I am unfamiliar with the math used to calculate that value.
Would it not work like a parity RAID where each sector would have parity bits in a different location on the disc?
I'm not familiar with it either, but I'd say that using RAID on a single disc is silly... There's a good reason it's not a common practice on single HDDs.
A scratch on the disc usually means many scratches on the disc.
I suppose with that much data capacity they could halve the storage and add redundancy. My question is will it only have 1 reading head? That much data is going to take a very long time to read, unless they're doing multiple layers at a time,
With a rate 1/2 you can't expect to correct more than 5.5% of errors.
I am unfamiliar with the math used to calculate that value.
Would it not work like a parity RAID where each sector would have parity bits in a different location on the disc?
I'm not familiar with it either, but I'd say that using RAID on a single disc is silly... There's a good reason it's not a common practice on single HDDs.
A scratch on the disc usually means many scratches on the disc.