Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ST3000DM001

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 259 posts

Re: ST3000DM001

#21

Post by bigiain »

edward wrote: post #19

In 2012 I was working at the Internet Archive. I remember the 2011 Thailand floods restricted the supply of hard disks and pushed up prices. The best deal we could find was buying these Seagate hard disks as external drives at retail from Costco. We picked up a truck load. Then had somebody with a screw driver remove them all from the enclosures and install them in new servers. The error rate was high, the drives did…

Dropbox (or maybe BackBlaze?) called that "shucking".

Re: ST3000DM001

#22

Post by Maakuth »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #4

I also remember the IBM Deskstar 75GXP, which was so unreliable it earned the nickname "Deathstar".

And then they cleaned up their act, sold to Hitachi and are now the most reliable disks under HGST brand, currently owned by WD. Somebody suggested you should buy disks from manufacturers that have relative recent history of a catastrophe. Those should be cutting less corners.

Re: ST3000DM001

#23

Post by Lammy »

rektide wrote: post #2

I could have sworn it was a similar 1.5TB drive that most infamous. Ah well.

You're probably thinking of the Barracuda 7200.11's event-log suicide-roulette firmware bug. It was the first time I ever had to update the firmware of a fixed disk, and I remember it being a huge pain since the revised "SD1A" firmware came with a brand new bug and had to immediately updated again:

- https://msfn.org/board/topic/128807-the-solution-for-seagate...

- https://www.anandtech.com/show/3482

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagate_Barracuda#Firmware_bug...

Re: ST3000DM001

#24

Post by myrandomcomment »

Back in the mid 90s I was working in IT at a midsized company. We used Compaq desktops (this is the Pentium Pro timeframe). The HD in the system where quantum fireball (IIRC). They failed at an amazing rate all in the first 3 months (30%). We called Compaq at one point and said, look we want replacement drives for all of our remaining systems. After much back and forth (stupid on their part as we had 1000+ machines over their complete line, including servers, so good customer) they refused to help saying “we will only replace them as they fail.” Fine, as you wish. A week later we called into support and reported the failure of 50 HD. They did not believe us. Sent 3 technicians. After they tested the 20th HD the look on their face was priceless. At some point one of the techs noticed the taser on the one of the other work benches in IT. An hour later we received a call from the sale rep telling us that they would replace all the current drives in every system with this model as long as there are no more “mass failures.”

Re: ST3000DM001

#25

Post by batmaniam »

I remember this fiasco. There was a class action lawsuit that was filed. I got curious as to what happened with that, and it turns out... nothing. From the wiki:

> On June 15, 2018, Judge Joseph Spero ruled that the class action plaintiffs must separate into multiple classes, as there was too much variability in failure rates to combine all claims a single class. In 2019, the plaintiffs were denied class certification a second time.

So basically Seagate got away with it.

Re: ST3000DM001

#26

Post by dheera »

Koiwai wrote: post #9

Damn, I have a 12 disk RAID-Z2 with that, almost all of them failed in about 1~2 years, luckily because of Z2, I didn't lose any data. I'll never buy seagate again.

Back in the day I used IBM drives and they were super reliable. Too bad they stopped making hard drives and all the Maxtors, Seagates, Hitachis, and WDs came along with all their crap.

Re: ST3000DM001

#28

Post by fencepost »

keanebean86 wrote: post #6

I like to think the flood was a cover for some government buying a mind boggling quantity of hard drives. All for some massive spying operation. Obviously I have zero proof or even the tiniest bit of evidence. Just my personal conspiracy theory.

I like to think the flood was a cover for some government buying a mind boggling quantity of hard drives.

No, it was a cover for massive flooding that killed more than 800 people and led to most of Thailand being designated as disaster areas.

Re: ST3000DM001

#29

Post by colordrops »

edward wrote: post #19

In 2012 I was working at the Internet Archive. I remember the 2011 Thailand floods restricted the supply of hard disks and pushed up prices. The best deal we could find was buying these Seagate hard disks as external drives at retail from Costco. We picked up a truck load. Then had somebody with a screw driver remove them all from the enclosures and install them in new servers. The error rate was high, the drives did…

The Thailand story was a cover for the NSA buying a huge number of drives for the new data facility in Utah.

Re: ST3000DM001

#30

Post by segfaultbuserr »

colordrops wrote: post #29
edward wrote: post #19

In 2012 I was working at the Internet Archive. I remember the 2011 Thailand floods restricted the supply of hard disks and pushed up prices. The best deal we could find was buying these Seagate hard disks as external drives at retail from Costco. We picked up a truck load. Then had somebody with a screw driver remove them all from the enclosures and install them in new servers. The error rate was high, the drives did…

The Thailand story was a cover for the NSA buying a huge number of drives for the new data facility in Utah.

Too bad for the NSA that they couldn't use Chia mining as the cover back then. /s
Post reply on HN