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

101–110 of 259 posts

Re: ST3000DM001

#101

Post by vasac »

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.

I brought 4 WD Green 2TB disks 7-8 years ago. All failed in the next few years because their firmware was parking the heads after 8 seconds of inactivity. And they were rated for 300.000 cycles so at the time that become common knowledge I already had one failed disk and 3 others with way more cycles than it should. Sadly, flashing new firmware didn't stop the rest from failing.

Re: ST3000DM001

#102

Post by matclayton »

theospears wrote: post #53

I was responsible for maintaining some large glusterfs clusters built on top of these drives, and they certainly added excitement to the experience. 1) At one point we were experiencing disk failures often enough that we wrote a cronjob to detect drive failures via smartctl and automatically send an email to our hosting company requesting them replace the drive. This saved engineering time, and more importantly reduc…

That serial number sends shivers down my spine. I also used to work on this system, and still do! At one point seagate admitted that the firmware was faulty. It would periodically stop responding under load, and cause the raid controller to think the drive had failed, causing it to remove it from the array.

I’ve never seen this posted publicly by them, but I’m fairly sure a revised firmware was offered. We deemed it too risky to upgrade the drives one at a time, so built a new cluster on Western Digital drives.

Re: ST3000DM001

#103

Post by wilco4 »

> The lawsuit also pointed to user reviews of the hard disk drive on Newegg, which totaled more than 700 reviews with 2 or fewer stars. [5]

Oh boy.

Re: ST3000DM001

#104

Post by wilco4 »

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.

This might be the funniest thing I've read all day.

Re: ST3000DM001

#105

Post by tester34 »

londons_explore wrote: post #100
Scramblejams wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time a submission like this pops up I expect someone who worked at Seagate during that era to pipe up and explain what went wrong and why ... but I haven't seen it yet. Surprising.

I think it's sad that the hacker/maker community doesn't have enough knowledge/skill/inclination to disassemble this kind of thing and figure it out for themselves. It's a bad sign when tech complexity gets out of the expertise of a hobbyist - I believe that's the start of a stagnation of that technology as new young engineers never get excited about disassembling and modding hard drives in their free time, and in tu…

haha, it's even better if you replace in your comment hard drives with CPUs

Re: ST3000DM001

#106

Post by anticodon »

simondotau wrote: post #57
colordrops wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The plausibility of a conspiracy theory diminishes as the number of people necessary to keep the secret increases. How many people work in Thailand's hard drive manufacturing plants? Hundreds? Thousands? How many people in the logistics channels? How many people are vending food to these employees? How many people in the US Government? Oh, and pulling this off would also require co-ordination with Thai Government. Th…

But where would a person speak to disclose the secret? Internet is very effectively censored by the US monopolies now.

If something is not indexed by Google, it's effectively non-existent. FAANG censorship is fast and effective. E.g. there were many important US bureaucrats involved in the Theranos scandal (even current US president). When I try to find anything related to that matter now, Google returns pages with many links removed by censors. It's almost impossible to find people responsible for withdrawing money from US budget via Theranos.

Also, assuming that 3 letter agencies were involved in the operation, any whistleblower would understand that destiny of Epstein will await her/him in near future.

Also, there's no "independent" journalism, all media belong to few influential entities, there's only approved articles appear in newspapers, magazines, on TV and YouTube.

Re: ST3000DM001

#107

Post by pas »

sinyug wrote: post #85
simondotau wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The plausibility of a conspiracy theory diminishes as the number of people necessary to keep the secret increases. How many people work in Thailand's hard drive manufacturing plants? Hundreds? Thousands? How many people in the logistics channels? How many people are vending food to these employees? How many people in the US Government? Oh, and pulling this off would also require co-ordination with Thai Government. Th…

> The plausibility of a conspiracy theory diminishes as the number of people necessary to keep the secret increases. Not if you can discredit those who dare to speak out by labeling them "conspiracy theorists," thereby discouraging others from coming out as well. I remember an episode from an old American sitcom where people make fun of the dad (an airline pilot) when he claims to have seen a UFO. It is the same thin…

... but aren't the observations itself part of the standard narrative, and the nonstandard part is how people explain them? (One standard explanation being that they are just some next-level high-tech stuff being tested.)

Re: ST3000DM001

#108

Post by BongoMcCat »

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.

This is probably some joke that I just don't understand, but just to be clear:

Are you saying that there either was no tsunami or that the NSA created the tsunami as a cover to buy harddrives?

Re: ST3000DM001

#109

Post by gerdesj »

Y_Y wrote: post #75
grp000 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not familiar with data center tools or terminology. What is a tazer in this context?

Sibling comments have answered this correctly, but I like to imagine it was there as a threat to the Compaq visitors, like one might leave a loaded gun in a visible spot to facilitate negotiation.

In these parts we threaten to withhold biscuits from meetings. Sometimes we really mean it. Escalating straight to firearms sounds a little bit excessive.
Post reply on HN