Is there anything similar for SSDs?
Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
101–110 of 165 posts
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#102HGST look like the best, but they don't have the quantities of the Seagate, makes me wonder if these numbers are skewed :/
My experience, over decades, but now coming up on half that ago, was that IBM/Hitachi/HGST are definitely worth it. I used to run a small hosting business, which had hundreds of discs, and consulting business which had clients with hundreds more discs. Seagates, in general, could always be expected to fail in a 3 year span. Often multiple times. IBM/Hitachi/HGST, especially the UltraStar enterprise line, would basica…
> improper cooling
You've had far more experience with this stuff than I have. I wonder what your view is on all these NAS RAID boxes and HDD longevity and heat.
I personally never saw so many HDD failures until I started running them inside a small NAS I bought some years ago. I nicknamed it my "drive killer" because I was replacing the things so often. Other HDDs I have in other (non-NAS) machines sure seemed to last much longer.
As for the Deathstar story: I had a similar experience with a Seagate. Inside the NAS, one of the SMART error counts started to rise in a foreboding way, so I replaced it (with an HGST) before it had a chance to die. Then, out of curiosity, I tried the old Seagate in a different non-critical setting (non-NAS) and it's continued to work for two more years. IDK. Too much heat?
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#103Relibality looks decent this year. All my seagates are having tons of errors, i think i'll stick to the other team from now on even though seagates seems to be getting better.
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't really count on those NOT happening - but we are more prepared now ;)
Yeah I mean that was the impetus for buying them off the shelves, wasn’t it? It was a crisis management technique not a business plan :)
Yes, that's right. It was one of those "better think quick" scenarios and we did what we had to in order to stay in business!
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#105HGST look like the best, but they don't have the quantities of the Seagate, makes me wonder if these numbers are skewed :/
They're not going to be skewed. HGST disks are usually more expensive, so that limits the quantity that they buy. The seagate disks are usually cheaper but have a slightly higher (except when it's a brand new line) failure rate. When filling out a single server I go with the HGST disks because the premium price and quality means fewer failures, but it's more cost effective to go for lots of seagate disks when you hav…
I agree (about Seagate being more cost effective for e.g. a datacenter). As private user I had in general bad experiences with Seagate (e.g. years ago I bought 8 2TB drives for 2 raid5 and 2 didn't even spin up, 1 failed after ~1 year) => I'm using since then only HGST and (pls. no jinx) so far only 1 has failed, but it "warned me in advance" with weird noises and terrible performance for ~1 week or so.
I now have at hetzner.de a host that has 3 4TB Seagate drives and I ended up building a 3-disks-raid1 instead of a raid5 because I'm too scared that when one drive fails, an additional one will fail as well during the rebuild-process when the remaining ones are stressed (a raid5 would then implode in this situation).
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclaimer: I work at Backblaze so I'm biased. :-) > If you have terabytes to back up, are there still any backup services left that'll let you ship them a drive for a faster initial backup? Backblaze offers a "Backblaze Rapid Ingest Fireball" to allow you to ship us 60 TBytes of data on an appliance. https://www.backblaze.com/blog/introducing-backblazes-rapid-... If you only have 2 - 10 TBytes, I suggest you get a f…
It's been over a year, can you please ask someone at backblaze to add a single line of code into the snapshots so you can leave a comment? Right now if you make a snapshot, the only info is the date and time. Not the data, what's in the snapshot, literally anything about it. Please!
Disclaimer: I work at Backblaze.
> please add ability to comment on snapshots
Actually, very very quietly as part of the 6.0 release (4 days ago), we now allow you to "name your snapshot".
While this is not a comment, and you can't change the name LATER (so useless to old snapshots), at least going forward you can put up to about 1,000 characters of description in the snapshot name.
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#107Thank you Backblaze! I love your reports.
What is your procedure/policy on which disks to use in the pods? Do you try and maybe control the risk by using different harddisk brands in a single storage pod? Or do you just not care, because there have never been 3 pods dead at the same time? :)
Do you still use 17 data plus 3 parity shards?
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Be wary of freeloading the upload bandwidth on a pipe that belongs to someone else.
I wouldn't advocate for breaking any laws or stealing anything that doesn't belong to you, but a whole lot of places have "totally unused bandwidth" and it won't hurt them at all financially for you to use 1/4 of their unused capacity. Funny story: I'm kind of unusual that I run an open WiFi hotspot in my home, because I have plenty of unused bandwidth and guests in my house and even neighbors are welcome to borrow s…
> and it won't hurt them at all financially for you to use 1/4 of their unused capacity.
Unless they have data caps in their contact and you go over them. Or they monitor for anomalies and data leaks and the IT will come asking questions / reporting incident. If you don't know everything about the setup and have an approval, don't do it.
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure how that would be useful, since terabytes don't fail. When a drive fails, it's effectively a brick with no terabytes.
Disclaimer: I work at Backblaze. > When a drive fails, it's effectively a brick with no terabytes. Interesting factoid: that isn't always true. What you describe is actually the CLEANEST type of failure, the drive suddenly becomes a brick. We replace the drive and rebuild it from parity. A way more interesting failure is when disk blocks start going bad at an unacceptable rate. Backblaze splits your data across 20 di…
(thanks a lot - all extremely interesting)
>> We can't have more than 3 drives fail in any one group of 20 drives...
Wow, for me, subjectively, an low threshold - and I underderstand that each drive being hosted on a different machine protects you as well from a machine/controller failure (happened to me twice with the controller - both times it was very hard to diagnose and the experience in general has been terrible).
Do you have as well "backups"? Or is that in the hands of the customers/users?
Re: Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2018
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone have a good source of HGST drives? On Amazon, it used to be you could only get them from resellers and some comments complained about getting used drives. I basically stopped buying HDs from Amazon from resellers. EDIT: Example: THEY ONLY WAY YOU CAN VERIFY THAT YOU DID INDEED RECEIVE THE FULL 5 YEAR HGST WARRANTY IS YOU MUST CALL HGST TECHNICAL SERVICE, GIVE THEM THE SERIAL NUMBER AND ASK IF THE DRIVE IS A NO…
Agreed. I only buy storage for personal use, but I've learned to avoid Amazon entirely. There are just way too many reports of fake or repackaged HDDs, SSDs, SD cards etc. I can generally get the same or relatively comparable prices at local computer stores that I trust significantly more than Amazon.
Be careful as there are reports of the same issue at Bestbuy(And will be with any store). With the 8TB easystore (and now the 10tb as well) being so cheap, there've been several reports of shucking the drives only to find a lower tier drive or just sand or whatnot.
This includes drives that were shrink-wrapped! I've heard bestbuy re-wraps returns and doesn't check them very well.