Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
backblaze.com
Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
1–10 of 168 posts
Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#2Biggest takeaway was at the end, with the "enterprise" drives being slightly less reliable than the consumer ones at half the cost.
Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#3Tangential: When are you going to offer a linux client?
Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#4All my WD and Seagate drives have failed within two years of use. Call me the luckiest.
Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#5Tangential: When are you going to offer a linux client?
Even better, when will be FreeBSD client available?! :)
Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#6Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#7Not that I use even 0.001% of the disks that BackBlaze go through, but my anecdata suggests the same. The only dead hard disks I have on my desk at the moment are Seagate, and they dominate the disks I've sent back in the last few years.
However, they are cheap, and they do honour their warranties. Would just be nice if they didn't have to quite so much.
Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#8Biggest takeaway was at the end, with the "enterprise" drives being slightly less reliable than the consumer ones at half the cost.
Second takeaway: if you want working HDDs, go with Hitachi.
Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#9My main Linux box has quite a few hard drives in it from a large range of time. About 4 weeks ago the oldest of them all died: it is from 2007, so about 7 years old, which I think is pretty good for a consumer drive that's on 24/7. It was a Western Digital Caviar SE WD3200JB, 320GB. I replaced it with a 2TB drive.
[No lost data, I do daily backups.]
Re: Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014
#10I wish there was something similar for SSDs.