91–100 of 150 posts
The Western Digital Velociraptor is pretty tough to beat. Near SSD performance (depending on what you are doing) and reliable. For compiling code it's definitely the best choice.
Always love reading HDD reliability stats from Backblaze -- but this demonstrates one of the reasons why post dating is so important, especially when the information in the post is time-sensitive. Nowhere on the page does it say that the post date is today, unless you click the "latest posts" tab by the author below. I had originally though it was a repost of the many older articles from Backblaze until seeing a refe…
Yev from Backblaze here -> it's an internal debate as to whether we should put dates on everything. It used to be that they were part of the URL (because of the way our blog was designed) but that is no longer the case. We decided to leave them off for a while to see if that made posts more "evergreen", but we definitely see where it can lead to some confusion. We'll keep chatting about it internally, there's likely…
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8923016
Timing is everything, I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's funny how things can turn around so completely. Around the time of the Deathstar fiasco, you couldn't pay me to use a Hitachi. Seagate was the brand to buy. Now it's the complete opposite.
I still cringe a little bit when I see "Deskstar", but apparently they've turned it around in a big way. I'm still irrationally scared, though.
http://www.computerhistory.org/groups/storagesig/media/docs/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that you can get 512GB M2 SSDs now, I'd say go for that if you're worried about reliability. From what I've read, SSDs are more reliable unless you're trying very hard to wear out their endurance (on the order of 2PB according to http://techreport.com/review/27436/the-ssd-endurance-experim... )
but there can be some interesting not-a-failure modes, I know because I suffered one and the recovery was a nightmare due to overly-protective UEFI. Fortunately, anything on my local SSD is only in cache and not to be worried about ;) (and I managed to put the UEFI in dumb mode so it wouldn't interfere)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not sure if I trust what you guys did, calling the old Hitachi Drives as HGST. > I don't know if HGST drives are related to the old Hitachi models at all. FTA: > Some of the HGST drives listed were manufactured under their previous brand, Hitachi. We’ve been asked to use the HGST name and we have honored that request.
> We’ve been asked to use the HGST name and we have honored that request. // Intriguing - that suggests some sort of advertising deal? Which calls in to question the impartiality of the report. Who asked them? In what context? Why accede to a third parties interference in the report? Are Backblaze getting reduced price HGST drives now?
Hitachi (owned by Toshiba) and HGST (owned by WD) are two different companies. You can't say a drive was manufactured by Hitachi/Toshiba when it was actually a HGST drive.
Name/Model Size Number of Drives Average Age in years Annual Failure Rate 95% Confidence Interval
HGST Deskstar 7K2000
(HDS722020ALA330) 2.0 TB 4,641 3.9 1.1% 0.8% – 1.4%
HGST Deskstar 5K3000
(HDS5C3030ALA630) 3.0 TB 4,595 2.6 0.6% 0.4% – 0.9%Oof. I've got a NAS with 4 3TB Seagate Barracudas, same model number as the drives with the 46% failure rate. One's already failed, and I replaced it with the same model drive. Anyone have a recommendation for how to replace all the drives with more reliable models without wrecking the RAID? Downtime is okay, but I don't have spare space for the contents to make a giant backup. It's currently set up as a "Synology Hy…
It would also be a good idea to check the NAS vendors forums.
The top two rows seem to be contradictory. How can you have a smaller annual failure rate AND a smaller average age? Name/Model Size Number of Drives Average Age in years Annual Failure Rate 95% Confidence Interval HGST Deskstar 7K2000 (HDS722020ALA330) 2.0 TB 4,641 3.9 1.1% 0.8% – 1.4% HGST Deskstar 5K3000 (HDS5C3030ALA630) 3.0 TB 4,595 2.6 0.6% 0.4% – 0.9%
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yev from Backblaze here -> it's an internal debate as to whether we should put dates on everything. It used to be that they were part of the URL (because of the way our blog was designed) but that is no longer the case. We decided to leave them off for a while to see if that made posts more "evergreen", but we definitely see where it can lead to some confusion. We'll keep chatting about it internally, there's likely…
BREAKING NEWS -> There are now dates on all of the individual blog posts. The landing page is "date-free" but is in chronological order, if you open a post, the date will be below the title...AS NATURE INTENDED!