4 ms·
It certainly seems that way. Earlier this year I was looking for internal 2.5" HDDs with more than 1TB of capacity, and I could only find Seagate drives. I try
by quectophoton 3y ago
It certainly seems that way. Earlier this year I was looking for internal 2.5" HDDs with more than 1TB of capacity, and I could only find Seagate drives.
I try to always buy from different vendors, but in this case I had no choice but to buy 2 drives of the same model.
- Tijdreiziger 3y agoI just looked because I thought that can’t be right, and it seems like all three manufacturers (WD, Seagate and Toshiba) sell such drives https://tweakers.net/interne-harde-schijven/vergelijken/#filter:LY49DsIwDEbv4tlCdhLSpAdAYmDqiBhCayBSaKu2IATq3UkEk_X8Pf984DyFvtt3M9RHJkXI7DSysvaEIK82PTrpmtsw_gS7NZg1z6iMq7A0LHoyFitDGjUZhV47rMj6vCD2T5mWMt5IknaJQw_1JaRZEMZwlSa-BeotZZpiK4eY4wzzKO0upkWmfPUDTL6Ue0lBEdGGAOEeXgX_vCI4zUV7hpRfBXas4LSu6xc https://tweakers.net/interne-harde-schijven/vergelijken/#fil...
- quectophoton 3y agoHuh, okay I'm facepalming now. I have no excuse. I even used PCPartPicker for this PC build but for some reason it didn't occur to me to search for possible drives there to see what other stores could have them besides my usual stores (also I avoid Amazon for anything related to computers). Thank you for removing my tunnel vision.
- justsomehnguy 3y agoBe warned - all SATA drives there are SMR.
- Tijdreiziger 3y agoFor a desktop drive, it shouldn’t matter since you’re probably not going to RAID it, right? (I guess it might be slower for big transfers, but since you’re probably going to keep frequently-accessed files on an SSD, that shouldn’t be a huge problem either)
- quectophoton 3y agoI do have them in a ZFS mirror, actually. And I noticed the performance is abysmal, both read and write. So the warning is a good one. For my use case it's just Yet Another Different Place (tm) to keep another copy of some files, so I can tolerate low performance if it means it's cheaper. Since I'm still learning and don't have enough confidence in my abilities when it comes to storage reliability, I know that it's just a matter of time until I mess up and lose a few drives due to a silly mistake from my part.
- Tijdreiziger 3y agoHmm, I’ve read that the combination of SMR drives and ZFS is a surefire way to lose data though. Apparently, if you need to rebuild the array due to losing a drive, it will take so long (and stress the remaining drives so much) that the chances of losing another drive in the process are non-negligible, thereby losing the data on the entire array. Therefore, it might be wise to consider CMR drives for your use case. As a general tip, all three manufacturers have specific NAS-class drives, which cost a bit more but are more reliable and usually CMR: - WD has their Red Plus/Pro line (the non-Plus/Pro Reds are SMR, so avoid those) - Seagate has their Ironwolf (Pro) line - Toshiba has their N300 line edit: ah, you just have them in a mirror. In that case, the magnitude of the risk may be less as you only need to copy data once to rebuild. I’m not sure though as I’m not an expert on the topic.
- quectophoton 3y agoI appreciate the advice. Thanks!
- justsomehnguy 3y agoRe-checked, by the cache size Toshiba MQ03ABB200, 2TB is a CMR drive. Rule of thumb - drives with 16Mb (or less, but you probably don't want a 8Mb cache drive in 2023, lol) are CMR, drives with >128Mb cache are 99% SMR. And look at my sibling comment