4 ms·

Exactly. I used to pore over the Backblaze data but so much of it is in the form of “we got 1,200 drives four months ago and so far none have failed”. That is a

Exactly. I used to pore over the Backblaze data but so much of it is in the form of “we got 1,200 drives four months ago and so far none have failed”. That is a relatively small number over a small amount of time. On top of that it seems like by the time there is a clear winner for reliability, the manufacturer no longer makes that particular model and the newer models are just not a part of the dataset yet. Basically, you can’t just go “Hitachi good, Seagate bad”. You have to look at specific models and there are what? Hundreds? Thousands?

toast0 1y ago
> On top of that it seems like by the time there is a clear winner for reliability, the manufacturer no longer makes that particular model and the newer models are just not a part of the dataset yet. That's how things work in general. Even if it is the same model, likely parts have changed anyway. For data storage, you can expect all devices to fail, so redundancy and backup plans are key, and once you have that set, reliability is mostly just a input into your cost calculations. (Ideally you do something to mitigate correlated failures from bad manufacturing or bad firmware)
account42 1y ago
"Actually HGST was better on average than WD"is probably about the only kind of conclusion you can make. As you have noted, looking at specific models doesn't get you anything useful because by the time you have enough data the model is already replaced by a different one - but you can make out trends for manufacturers.