| 1 |
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Adam Carter <adamcarter3@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> TFA doesn't mention drive vendors. Does "others" in the "fingering others" |
| 4 |
> statement refer to other SMART metrics? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Backblaze published their vendor stats recently. Hitachi drives were |
| 7 |
the best, followed by WD. Then WAY behind those two were Seagate. I |
| 8 |
noticed that I own two of the drives that they claim they have a 15% |
| 9 |
annual failure rate on - I just warranty replaced one of them so I'm |
| 10 |
at about 50% right now on that model. :) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Unfortunately the WD drives are a considerable step-up in cost. Even |
| 13 |
factoring in a 15% annual replacement rate on the Seagates after the |
| 14 |
first 3 years (the warranty period I think) it will take a long time |
| 15 |
for the WD drives to be cheaper, let alone the Hitachis (or whoever |
| 16 |
they were sold to). I must have burned through a half-dozen warranty |
| 17 |
replacements on my one system in the last 2-3 years - mostly Seagate. |
| 18 |
Just another reason to use RAID/btrfs/zfs/etc. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Rich |
Archives