<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">I recently wrote a blog about a local
      petabyte system. They use the WD red nas drives.<br>
      <br>
      <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://kateleyco.com/?p=815">http://kateleyco.com/?p=815</a><br>
      <br>
      linda<br>
      <br>
      <br>
      On 12/1/14, 9:07 PM, Jeremy MountainJohnson wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CACEdYO04DY+aWRUdn9kJSKPRbDFDUejc1mAREJ8idGgvTxVcCA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">Thanks, I was leaning toward giving the Red NAS
        drives a shot, but went with two WD Blue drives, they were on
        sale really cheap. I noticed some manufacturers don't even make
        1 TB anymore, which is actually what I'd prefer to stick with.
        RAID drives with 3 - 4 TB give me the impression there is a
        little more room for failure on a RAID, that, and it's more than
        I need. 
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>I've used green drives when handed them to me at a previous
          job for a NAS, they actually did okay for about a year of
          large (images) being archived on them, then one of four
          started relocating sectors like crazy. I wouldn't rule the
          greens out with spares on hand for a home NAS. 
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>I've seen the studies about Seagate. I must of lucked out
            before they went south, the first two I have still have
            their 5 year warranty and no issues popping up in SMART yet
            (I think they are about 4 years old now). </div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>Backing up the old raid to an external. With the amount
            of backups I have, if I do decide to try zfs before the
            sticking with a Linux software raid I'll post the experience
            here. </div>
        </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>Thanks again for all the great suggestions,</div>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
        <div>
          <div class="gmail_signature">--<br>
            Jeremy MountainJohnson<br>
            <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:Jeremy.MountainJohnson@gmail.com"
              target="_blank">Jeremy.MountainJohnson@gmail.com</a></div>
        </div>
        <br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 1:55 PM, <span
            dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:tclug@freakzilla.com" target="_blank">tclug@freakzilla.com</a>></span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I've been
            using WD Red drives in my arrays for a few years now. Had
            one (out of like 16) go bad after a year or so, WD replaced
            it with no hassle at all.<br>
            <br>
            I would recommend buying at least 1 extra drive per array,
            so you have a hot-spare.
            <div class="HOEnZb">
              <div class="h5"><br>
                <br>
                On Mon, 1 Dec 2014, Dan Armbrust wrote:<br>
                <br>
                <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
                  .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
                  On 11/29/2014 09:06 AM, Jeremy MountainJohnson wrote:<br>
                  <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
                    .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
                    Based on a lot of recent tests, I'll probably go
                    with Western Digital<br>
                    drives for the cost savings and longevity, unless
                    anyone has other<br>
                    suggestions?<br>
                    <br>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                  Based on the pile of dead drives laying on my desk
                  right now (and the links below), avoid Seagate like
                  the plague.  Unless you really like swapping disks all
                  the time.<br>
                  I tried out a WD "Green" drive for an application
                  where performance didn't matter as well (offline
                  storage in a fire safe, with monthly updates), because<br>
                  it was cheap - and it was junk too.  It literally
                  worked 3 times, before failed entirely.<br>
                  <br>
                  Higher end WD is probably better - but lately, I've
                  been spending the extra $ for Hitachi / HGST drives
                  for systems where I don't want to deal with drive
                  failures:<br>
                  <br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="https://www.backblaze.com/blog/what-hard-drive-should-i-buy/"
                    target="_blank">https://www.backblaze.com/blog/what-hard-drive-should-i-buy/</a><br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-update-september-2014/"
                    target="_blank">https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-update-september-2014/</a><br>
                  <br>
                  WD now owns the Hitachi drive line, but they don't
                  seem to have ruined it yet.<br>
                  <br>
                  As far as disk size... 2 or 3 TB isn't that much
                  higher than 1 TB these days....  especially if you go
                  with the cheapest drives, and just deal with the
                  inevitable failures.<br>
                  <br>
                  Depending on how the numbers shake out, however, you
                  might come out ahead just running 3 6TB drives in a
                  mirror config, rather than 5 smaller drives in a
                  different RAID config to get your 2 drive
                  fail-safety.  Another nice aspect of a simple mirror
                  setup, is  you can pull a drive and read it, without
                  needing the RAID config.<br>
                  <br>
                  Dan<br>
                  _______________________________________________<br>
                  TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota<br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="mailto:tclug-list@mn-linux.org"
                    target="_blank">tclug-list@mn-linux.org</a><br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list"
                    target="_blank">http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list</a><br>
                  <br>
                </blockquote>
                _______________________________________________<br>
                TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota<br>
                <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:tclug-list@mn-linux.org" target="_blank">tclug-list@mn-linux.org</a><br>
                <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list"
                  target="_blank">http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list</a><br>
              </div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tclug-list@mn-linux.org">tclug-list@mn-linux.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list">http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>