Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage > #6799
| From | "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage |
| Subject | Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" |
| Date | 2016-02-17 10:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dijgrvFg4s8U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <na00ot$i66$1@dont-email.me> <XnsA5B0D6E03DC5CD4AM2@216.151.153.41> |
On 02/16/2016 04:07 PM, pamela wrote: > On 20:31 16 Feb 2016, Lynn McGuire wrote: > >> "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" >> https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-q4-2015 >> / >> >> "By the end of 2015, the Backblaze datacenter had 56,224 >> spinning hard drives containing customer data. These hard drives >> reside in 1,249 Backblaze Storage Pods. By comparison 2015 began >> with 39,690 drives running in 882 Storage Pods. We added 65 >> Petabytes of storage in 2015 give or take a Petabyte or two. Not >> only was 2015 a year of growth, it was also a year of drive >> upgrades and replacements." >> >> Uh oh, the WDC 2 TB and 3 TB drive failure rate is climbing. >> And the WDC 6 TB is scary also. > Wasn't Seagate doing badly not long ago at Backblaze? The 3TB Seagates were bad; the other capacities were much better. But the design of the 3TB ones*might* have improved since. I have a bunch of 2TB "Desktop" Seagates running 24/7 in a FreeNAS machine. One -- an older model that came with a 5-year warranty -- failed and was replaced by a newer model (one that normally comes with only a 2-year warranty but carried the remainder of the original 5-year warranty). One of the newer models (out of warranty) showed a read error but was "fixed" by SeaTools and now, even after an extensive workout (HD Sentinel PRO's 34-hour read, write, read), shows no errors. If you read the NewEgg reviews, you will find that for *every* brand of hard disk there are people who will never buy one of that manufacturer's products again. Perce
Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
"Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com> - 2016-02-16 14:31 -0600
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" pamela <invalid@nospam.com> - 2016-02-16 21:07 +0000
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 21:52 +0800
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" DevilsPGD <boogabooga@crazyhat.net> - 2016-02-17 17:48 -0800
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 19:27 +0800
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" DevilsPGD <boogabooga@crazyhat.net> - 2016-02-26 13:04 -0800
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 13:05 +1100
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" Sam <newsgroup2003@gmail.com> - 2016-03-13 19:53 -0700
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 19:53 +1100
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2016-02-17 10:10 -0500
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 13:08 +1100
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2016-02-17 11:01 -0500
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 13:10 +1100
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" pedro1492@lycos.com - 2016-03-18 19:07 -0700
Re: "Hard Drive Reliability Review for 2015" "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 06:56 +1100
csiph-web