91–100 of 209 posts
I bought a bunch of 28 TB Seagate Exos drives refurbished for not that much money. I still can't believe that 28TB drives are even possible.
Check your FARM logs. It sounds like people who were using the drives to mine the Chia cryptocurrency are dumping large capacity drives as Chia's value has fallen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
US -> DE latency hurts though. I used them when I was in europe but migrated away after I came stateside. Not a problem for cold-storage/batch jobs of course.
you should still be able to saturate your bandwidth with poor latency
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An amazing amount if you consider that 16EB is the amount of data a 64-bit quantity can address, and this is over a quarter of that.
Wow, that’s a cool stat. I wonder if people will ever seriously use 16EB of memory in a single system and will need to change to a more-than-64-bit architecture or if 64 bit is truly enough. This has „640k ought to be enough for anybody“ potential (and I know he didn’t say that).
nbdkit can emulate disks up to 2^63-1 which is also the same maximum size that the Linux kernel currently supports: https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2018/09/05/nbdkit-for-loopback-pt... https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2018/09/06/nbdkit-for-loopback-pt...
It continues to surprise me why Backblaze still trades at a fraction of its peak COVID share price. A well-managed company with solid fundamentals, strong IP and growing.
I think there's a very small chance that Backblaze will be.
Nothing against them, but it's virtually impossible to compete long-term with the economies of scale, bundling and network effects of the major cloud providers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nowadays you can get a petabyte in a single machine (50 drives 20TB each).
Out of curiosity, what server cases can actually accommodate 50 drives?
There are other less publicly well known things with 72 to 96 drive trays in a single 'server' which are manufactured by taiwanese OEMs for large scale operators. The supermicro is just the best visual example I can think of right now with a well laid out marketing webpage.
edit: some photos
https://www.servethehome.com/supermicro-ssg-6047r-e1r72l-72x...
It's not a best practice, but the last 10 years I've run my home server with a smaller faster drive for the OS and a single larger disk for bulk storage that I choose using Backblaze Drive Stats. None of have failed yet (fingers-crossed). I really trust their methodology and it's an extremely valuable resource for me as a consumer. My most recent drive is a WDC WUH722222ALE6L4 22TiB, and looking at the stats (albeit…
Take these stats with a grain of salt. I am becoming more and more convinced that hard drive reliability is linked to the batch more than to the individual drive models themselves. Often you will read online of people experiencing multiple failures from drives purchased from the same batch. I cannot prove this because I have no idea about Blackblazes procurement patterns but I bought one of the better drives in this…
I'll toss in on that anecdata. This has happened to me a several times. In all these cases we were dealing with drives with more or less sequential serial numbers. In two instances they were just cache drives for our CDN nodes. Not a big deal, but I sure kept the remote hands busy those weeks trying to keep enough nodes online. In a prior job, it was our primary storage array. You'd think that RAID6+hot spare would be pretty robust, but 3 near simultaneous drive failures made a mockery of that. That was a bad day. The hot spare starting doing its thing with the first failure, and if it had finished rebuilding before the subsequent failures, we'd have been ok, but alas.
Although a minor pet peeve (knowing this is free): I would have loved to see a 'in-use meter' in addition to just 'the drive was kept powered on'. AFR doesn't make sense for a HDD unless we know how long and how frequently the drives were being used (# of reads/writes or bytes/s).
If all of them had a 99% usage through the entire year - then sure (really?).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nowadays you can get a petabyte in a single machine (50 drives 20TB each).
Out of curiosity, what server cases can actually accommodate 50 drives?
edit: They look like this: https://knowledgebase.45drives.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/0... (image from ddg)
I had five Seagates fail in my Synology NAS in less than a year. Somebody suggested it was a "bad" firmware on that model, but I switched to WD and haven't had a single failure since.
Unfortunately using all the same type of drive in any kinda of system is a recipe for disaster. Incompatibilities between the drive firmware and the device they're in can cause problems. Subtle harmonic issues with how the drives are mounted, which might be fine for some drives and disastrous for others. I've always found the best strategy with mechanical hard drives is to have various brands and models in the same d…
Drives are interchangeable for a reason. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
hopefully you have 2x of these drives in some kind of raid mirror such that if one fails, you can simply replace it and re-mirror. not having something like this is risky.
Wasn’t the issue with large drives that remaining drive has a high chance of failure during re-silvering?
Home use is also much more likely to suffer from unexpected adverse conditions that impact all the drives in the array simultaneously.
