L
-
Important Announcement for the TrueNAS Community.
The TrueNAS Community has now been moved. This forum will now become READ-ONLY for historical purposes. Please feel free to join us on the new TrueNAS Community Forums
- Status
L
L
Guest
Yea what's crazy about the seagate number for the 3tb drive is that they still use them. Using a different model they deployed 12k of them. On that model they see a apx 2% failure rate. To me that warns of thinking a single disk vendors is good or bad. There are some models better than others.
I have seen these kinds of numbers from a study between google and cmu too..
I have seen these kinds of numbers from a study between google and cmu too..
There are some things I'm not a fan of with the Backblaze Pods. For example:
1. The fact that the drives literally "sit" in the chassis. They aren't bolted to the chassis at all. That could mean that vibrations affect the drive more as the vibrational energy is not passed through to the chassis, and it could be that Seagate's design is more susceptible to vibrational problems than other brands.
2. They are literally sitting on the SATA port (which changes the axis of the vibrational energy in relation to gravity) as well as their relation to gravity as a whole.
3. I don't think I've seen much data on what their disk temperatures are like. It could be they are running hotter than what this community considers acceptable. I know when I had Seagates last they did run a bit hotter than other drives that were supposed to be equivalent in all the other major ways. From my experience, Seagates are particularly sensitive to problems at higher temperatures than other brands.
There's just too many variables. One thing I think we can all agree on though.. if Seagate had a 40%+ failure rate across their entire product line Seagate would be out of business. There's just no way that they could stay competitive with that kind of failure rate. :P
1. The fact that the drives literally "sit" in the chassis. They aren't bolted to the chassis at all. That could mean that vibrations affect the drive more as the vibrational energy is not passed through to the chassis, and it could be that Seagate's design is more susceptible to vibrational problems than other brands.
2. They are literally sitting on the SATA port (which changes the axis of the vibrational energy in relation to gravity) as well as their relation to gravity as a whole.
3. I don't think I've seen much data on what their disk temperatures are like. It could be they are running hotter than what this community considers acceptable. I know when I had Seagates last they did run a bit hotter than other drives that were supposed to be equivalent in all the other major ways. From my experience, Seagates are particularly sensitive to problems at higher temperatures than other brands.
There's just too many variables. One thing I think we can all agree on though.. if Seagate had a 40%+ failure rate across their entire product line Seagate would be out of business. There's just no way that they could stay competitive with that kind of failure rate. :P
jgreco
Resident Grinch
- Joined
- May 29, 2011
- Messages
- 18,680
Another disk reliability study by the same people who've been roundly criticized before for their poor methodology.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
