4 ms·
The difference between 2 years and 5 is quite significant for server runtime above water. This argument of diminishing returns would hold better for placing it
by badRNG 6y ago
The difference between 2 years and 5 is quite significant for server runtime above water. This argument of diminishing returns would hold better for placing it 1 year rather than 2, 9 months rather than 12, etc.
If the concern is that you'd see significant failure after 5 (which is likely) which could undercut your future plans, I could understand cutting the plan short.
- ses1984 6y agoIt seems reasonable to apply Bayes theorem. If the failure rate underwater after 2 years is less than normal..
- badRNG 6y agoFrom my anecdotal experience working in data centers early in my career, you really don't really know if your failure rate for a specific type of drive/server is atypical for quite some time. This information is critical for many businesses, as choosing which drive or which architecture model can have profound cost implications. It's quite possible that failures at the 5 year mark wont maintain a proportionate ratio with failures at the 2 year mark when compared to control. Maybe drive "A" tends to have an unacceptably high failure rate only after "X" hours of up-time.