Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Backblaze Publishes Hard Drive Reliability Stats for Q1 of 2018

posted by martyb on Thursday May 03 2018, @11:27PM   Printer-friendly
from the my-hard-drives-last-for-years dept.

hereweareagain writes:

Backblaze's hard drive report for the first quarter of 2018 is sure to be some interesting reading if you're interested in hard drive reliability. Seagate 10TB, WD 6TB and HGST 4TB appear to be the overall best, based on the number of drive failures (0) compared to the number of drives deployed.

More info here:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-reliable-are-10tb-and-12tb-hard-drives/

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-stats-for-q1-2018/

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Backblaze Publishes Hard Drive Reliability Stats for Q1 of 2018 | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 11 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @02:24PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @02:24PM (#675665)

    I've always been wary of Helium and Shingled (SMR) drive technology, so been sticking to the WD 6TB Reds at the moment for the past few years. But given this new data, I'll reconsider Helium drives now.

    SMR however, still wary, due to the poor performance when it comes to overwriting data instead of writing new data to unused space, and been bitten by this before when I filled once disk to capacity and started to overwrite data. I don't /expect/ this is a huge issue for BackBlaze since I'd guess the bulk of their data may be static - I may be wrong and their data turnover might be higher than I guess it to be - but it would be interesting for them to have stats for SMR drives as well, such as read/write speeds, how they perform in their pods under whatever workloads they run over their lifetime, and so on.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   1  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @09:11PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @09:11PM (#675854)

    I've used SMR disks and the reads are super fast as are fresh writes. Windows and Linux both seem to be smart enough to spread the writes around so it isn't really a problem. Day-to-day, they don't really seem much slower than regular disks. The real problem is on benchmarks or writes that are much larger than the cache. Those can be dog-slow, especially under heavy load.