4 ms·

> On the SSD side we have DRAMless and TLC. I'm happy to buy a DRAMless + TLC SSD for my boot disk on my web browsing PC (not development), it is a reasonable

> On the SSD side we have DRAMless and TLC. I'm happy to buy a DRAMless + TLC SSD for my boot disk on my web browsing PC (not development), it is a reasonable compromise for a lower price. Same for SMR drives, I won't have problems with them as backup disks. I think the problem here is SMR drives are sold without disclosure, and it has already created some serious problems in practice. > What’s worse, they’re shipping DM-SMR drives as “RAID” and “NAS” drives This is causing MAJOR problems – such as the latest iteration of WD REDs (WDx0EFAX replacing WDx0EFRX) being unable to be used for rebuilding RAID[56] or ZFS RAIDZ sets: They rebuiild for a while (1-2 hours), then throw errors and get kicked out of the set.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
magicalhippo 7y ago
> They rebuiild (sic) for a while (1-2 hours), then throw errors and get kicked out of the set. I don't doubt it, but do you have the source for that? I read stories about people using the Seagate Archive disks in RAIDZ and it worked fine for them.
- cthalupa 7y ago
  Mine completed the rebuild, but it took over 2 weeks vs. the usual 1-2 days my prior WD Red 6TBs had completed in. This has accelerated my move to enterprise 16TB drives, because I really don't want to expose myself to data loss on rebuilds taking hugely extended times.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - zozbot234 7y ago
    > Mine completed the rebuild, but it took over 2 weeks vs. the usual 1-2 days This also means you'll need a lot more HD's per RAID set to guard against multiple failures during rebuild. Which means that even the supposed data density/space advantage of SMR is moot - you'd be better off with PMR.
- segfaultbuserr 7y ago
  Source was the article on the HN homepage yesterday, I thought most have seen it, but for those who missed it, here it is. * Western Digital admits 2TB-6TB WD Red NAS drives use shingled magnetic recording https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/14/wd-red-nas-drives-shingled-magnetic-recording/ https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/14/wd-red-nas-drives-shin...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

magicalhippo 7y ago

> They rebuiild (sic) for a while (1-2 hours), then throw errors and get kicked out of the set. I don't doubt it, but do you have the source for that? I read stories about people using the Seagate Archive disks in RAIDZ and it worked fine for them.

cthalupa 7y ago
Mine completed the rebuild, but it took over 2 weeks vs. the usual 1-2 days my prior WD Red 6TBs had completed in. This has accelerated my move to enterprise 16TB drives, because I really don't want to expose myself to data loss on rebuilds taking hugely extended times.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- zozbot234 7y ago
  > Mine completed the rebuild, but it took over 2 weeks vs. the usual 1-2 days This also means you'll need a lot more HD's per RAID set to guard against multiple failures during rebuild. Which means that even the supposed data density/space advantage of SMR is moot - you'd be better off with PMR.
segfaultbuserr 7y ago
Source was the article on the HN homepage yesterday, I thought most have seen it, but for those who missed it, here it is. * Western Digital admits 2TB-6TB WD Red NAS drives use shingled magnetic recording https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/14/wd-red-nas-drives-shingled-magnetic-recording/ https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/14/wd-red-nas-drives-shin...