| 1 |
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann |
| 2 |
<volkerarmin@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Am 25.06.2014 19:06, schrieb Rich Freeman: |
| 4 |
>> Honestly, I think it makes far more sense to build a fault-tolerant |
| 5 |
>> setup than to try to avoid faults by spending more on the parts. I've |
| 6 |
>> only run desktop hard drives on my 24x7 RAID. If they die I replace |
| 7 |
>> them under warranty |
| 8 |
> so you are ripping of other customers? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I certainly am not aware of any warranty terms I'm violating. I just |
| 12 |
spot checked a drive warranty and it makes no mention of excluding |
| 13 |
continuous use, and the drive specifications do not contain any |
| 14 |
exclusions for continuous use. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The SMART data in the drives I've returned contains both the number of |
| 17 |
power cycles and power-on time, and I've yet to have a manufacturer |
| 18 |
question either. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
To exclude continuous operation their warranty would have to specify |
| 21 |
just how many hours per day their drives can be operated for. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
>> ANY hard drive can fail the day |
| 25 |
>> after you buy it, a month after you buy it, and so on, though |
| 26 |
>> obviously the probability of a particular drive failing at any point |
| 27 |
>> in time may vary by what you pay for it. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> or if it was meant to be used the way you use it. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Like I said, I'm certainly interested in any actual data that supports |
| 32 |
that drives sold to run 24x7 last any longer than desktop drives when |
| 33 |
run 24x7. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Rich |
Archives