Units available when setting up a storage node? TB/GB?

Hi Guys,

I have tried to find the answers but I couldn’t so I am asking here: when setting up a storage node I can see that the unit is “TB” but:
a) Can you use decimal TB? For example I have put “STORAGE=2.8TB” for my storage node, and it seems to have accepted it~ will it throw an error if it wasn’t correct?
b) Could I have used another unit like “GB” instead?..
c) When using “1TB”: does it equal “1000GB” or “1024GB”?

I know that on the Windows GUI (and according to the documentation) the unit is set to “TB”.

Thanks !

Welcome to the forum @jcn50!

Yes using TB or GB is fine (minimum 500GB). Make sure you are using only 90% of available free space and keep 10% for overhead.

1 Like

Thanks for the confirmation @nerdatwork, I have my answers for a) and b)! Now for c) anyone?

i would assume 1024GB but does it really matter it would only be a 2.4% deviation…

also the number on the storagenode can easily be changed later, it just sets a number of how much space the storagenode will aim for using, a max if you will… if set lower that the actual storagenode kept data then to my understanding the node will over time decrease in size.

Somehow it does because of the 10% overhead~ so with that 10%-2.4%=7.6% of overhead remains (or not).

Storj uses decimal units (1000GB). OS uses TiB (1024GB)

So if I put 1000GB in Storj it will be 1024GB on the OS side?..


Here’s a GB to GiB converter :slight_smile:

Thank you! :+1:

Funny enough: 1000GB = 931GiB, and with the 10% overhead: 931GiB + 10% = 1024 GiB, hahaha… :sweat_smile:

1 Like

This keeps being a pain, but OS’s tend to display the wrong unit. They display numbers in TiB, but wrongfully use the TB unit. Storj actually supports either and uses the correct units. If you put 1TB it would be 1000GB. 1TiB would be 1024GiB.

It wouldn’t.
1TB=1000^4=1000000000000 bytes
1TiB=1024^4=1099511627776‬ bytes
So almost exactly 10%.

1 Like

sorry i work in JEDEC standarts
not that that gibiwhatever insanity

And that’s the problem. That industry standard just sanctioned the misuse of wrong units. According to JEDEC both TB and TiB mean the same thing… that’s just insanity. These prefixes are used in other units as well, like KG for kilogram… that’s not 1024 grams is it?

The JEDEC mess has been superseded by widely adopted, internationally agreed upon IEC standards and is even defined in the International System of Units (SI). So yeah, I’m going by that. You know… the universal international standards set by independent standards organizations and not by one specific industry.

1 Like

yeah sadly i have seen that stuff pop up more and more…
and yes it does sort of make sense to follow the scientific notation, i guess i’m getting old lol
even the numbers i know is going out of date… lol ffs

reading up on it a bit… a bit… xD

1 Like

so basically what i consider a TB is now called a TiB… thats not going to confuse anybody … might be one of those cases where the cure is worse than the disease.

so my hdd’s are not 4kn but 4Kibn and i don’t have 48gb ram i got 48GiB RAM
i suppose that’s easy enough… so in a decade or so the confusion will be over lol when all the old tech that keep stating thing in old standarts die out…

why don’t we change what a kilogram is then while we are at it… oh wait we already did that… nevermind… lol

1TB is 1000GB in storj (also 1TiB would be 1TB in this case), 1.05TB might be 1100GB or 1.1TB effectively.
This is due to some strange rounding in the software. Reported a while ago: https://github.com/storj/storj/issues/3764

Therefore small changes make no difference.

1 Like

Basically every OS still displays it wrong in current versions. I wish people would just consistently switch, but it doesn’t seem to be happening. Hopefully with the difference getting bigger with the move to more frequent use of PB people will finally have enough of this confusion. But in general, they don’t really seem to care.

yes lets all move on to trippybytes of data now…
saw something about the original way they wanted the computer language to work with like a value for every word instead or something akin to that…until IBM i think decided to come up with the byte scheme and everybody just thought, why didn’t i think of that and followed suit…

I am glad my questions raised real concerns! :sweat_smile:

Something has just crossed my mind but it is too big to be added into this topic so I am going to open a new one.

1 Like