it doesnt matter what hard drives.
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
|
|
The Google study was of consumer-grade drives.
http://labs.google.c...disk_failures.pdf (13 page .pdf)
The data in this study are collected from a large number of disk drives, deployed in several types of systems across all of GoogleÂs services. More than one hundred thousand disk drives were used for all the results presented here. The disks are a combination of serial and parallel ATA consumer-grade hard disk drives, ranging in speed from 5400 to 7200 rpm, and in size from 80 to 400 GB. All units in this study were put into production in or after 2001. The population contains several models from many of the largest disk drive manufacturers and from at least nine different models. The data used for this study were collected between December 2005 and August 2006. I haven't heard about the CMU study before. Hmm... http://www.pdl.cmu.e...reData/index.html As part of this project, we have analyzed field-gathered disk replacement data from a number of large production systems, including high-performance computing sites and internet services sites. About 100,000 disks are covered by this data, some for an entire lifetime of five years. The data include drives with SCSI and FC, as well as SATA interfaces. The mean time to failure (MTTF) of those drives, as specified in their datasheets, ranges from 1,000,000 to 1,500,000 hours, suggesting a nominal annual failure rate of at most 0.88%. Below is a summary of a few of our results. On the other hand - http://www.pdsi-scid...roeder-fast08.pdf (16 page .pdf): (i) During the 41-month time period, we observe more than 400,000 instances of checksum mismatches, 8% of which were discovered during RAID reconstruction, creating the possibility of real data loss. Even though the rate of corruption is small, the discovery of checksum mismatches during reconstruction illustrates that data corruption is a real problem that needs to be taken into account by storage system designers. There do seem to be some benefits from using "enterprise" class disks, but I don't know if it's worth the cost for home to use "enterprise class" SATA (FC and SAS are out of the question) - e.g. $240 for 2TB vs $120 for 2TB Hitachis. Cheers, Scott. (Who probably won't go the "enterprise" route.) |
|
the enterprise grade recently shipped to me
has a 20% doa rate lately, dont think there is any real difference
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
|
|
Thanks.
|