At their scale it’s easy to utilise these efficiently despite the limitations.
They’re not very good in a small NAS or disk array. You’d need a big write cache in front of them and an OS that natively understands the sector groupings.
I used to just rely on FreeNAS but it’s not as straightforward anymore. I’m having to consider Linux and looking at bCache FS and ZFS vs BTRFS and how all this compares on an all PCIe (m.2) flash drive setup… where a drive (or two) at this sort of size (~50TB) would make a great second backup copy of the flash array that can be started and stopped to periodically make the backups to save power… but then you have to think about copy efficiency since I don’t want to have them wasting read bandwidth from the flash drives… and the best is usually like to like file system copy ZFS -> ZFS and BTRFS -> BTRFS … so it adds another complication into a mix that is already far from simple.
So it’s become something I’m keeping an eye out for… hopefully before it becomes something I may purchase, someone will have already done a good writeup.
I’ve worked on these systems. You might as well be asking F1 drivers for tips to help you commute to work.
The hyperscale stuff is not built on top of ordinary filesystems. It’s all clusters of machines, and error correction is handled at the level of clusters. If you’re evaluating systems like ZFS and BTRFS, then you’re already working with a radically different tech stack.
At scale, your file metadata is stored in a distributed database of some kind, and the file contents are stored with forward error correction across multiple machines in a cluster. Or something similar, but stored across multiple clusters. The pricing models for cloud storage are designed around the usage patterns—like, if you know that some data is going to stick around for 90 days, then SMR is a win. If a file could get deleted at any time, then SMR is a loss.
Boston drivers: "hold my beer."
ZFS is a great improvement over traditional hardware RAID systems, but is still in many ways clearly a descendant of them. BTRFS has a slightly different mix of features from ZFS that make it a bit more flexible and a better choice for consumers who don't buy drives by the dozen. Neither has a great solution for caching/tiering with SSDs and hard drives. Ceph has a lot of features that would otherwise be almost exclusive to the hyperscalers, but is too complicated for something like a turnkey NAS. bcachefs aspires to eventually have most of the features you would want for a non-clustered storage system.
Zoned storage is something many of the above already have some degree of support for, but as a paradigm it has not even started showing up in the consumer computing ecosystem so many of the issues with adopting zoned storage for consumer systems aren't even being worked on.
Sounds like the only uncertainty is in what the next capacity past 24TB will be, but it'll definitely be SMR rather than PMR.
Most likely, cloud vendors have a large choice of sizes to try to match requested sizes of logical disks to physical disks, but if most users don't want / need disks that are this big (or bigger), then the provider will have a problem.