What's the deal with the PCIe card for the WD drives ... ?
link
maybe it has to do with capacity and sata specification. the manual in the photo says "2.5/3 TB Hard Drives SATA Host Bus Adapter". upon inspection, the card is specified as sata III. maybe there's an interoperability issue at capacities >2 TB due when using sata II. just a guess!
maybe it has to do with capacity and sata specification. the manual in the photo says "2.5/3 TB Hard Drives SATA Host Bus Adapter". upon inspection, the card is specified as sata III. maybe there's an interoperability issue at capacities >2 TB due when using sata II. just a guess!
i wouldn't mind some of those cards. although i'm running out of room in which to put hard drives in my case.
the wd spins at 5400 rpm. too slow.
the seagate and hitachi are about the same in terms of performance. the hitatchi is better at random operations, and the seagate is better at contiguous operations.
i can't source the seagate. i guess i'll buy the hitachi.
the seagate and hitachi are about the same in terms of performance. the hitatchi is better at random operations, and the seagate is better at contiguous operations.
i can't source the seagate. i guess i'll buy the hitachi.
they both now have enterprise versions available.
hitatchi
ultrastar (enterprise, 1:10^15 error rate, MTBF 2 Mh) for $350
deskstar (consumer, 1:10^14 error rate, MTBF unknown) for $175
seagate
constellation es.2 (enterprise, 1:10^15 error rate, MTBF 1.2 Mh), price unknown
barracuda xt (consumer, 1:10^14 error rate, MTBF unknown), price unknown
hitatchi
ultrastar (enterprise, 1:10^15 error rate, MTBF 2 Mh) for $350
deskstar (consumer, 1:10^14 error rate, MTBF unknown) for $175
seagate
constellation es.2 (enterprise, 1:10^15 error rate, MTBF 1.2 Mh), price unknown
barracuda xt (consumer, 1:10^14 error rate, MTBF unknown), price unknown
should i do RAID-1 with three consumer disks or RAID-1 with two enterprise disks?
--
chance of data loss for RAID-1 with three consumer disks: 1:10^42
chance of data loss for RAID-1 with two enterprise disks: 1:10^30
--
three consumer disks is less expensive than two enterprise disks. it will be faster. in the event of a single disk failure, redundancy is maintained. however, having an extra disk will be louder and consume more power.
--
chance of data loss for RAID-1 with three consumer disks: 1:10^42
chance of data loss for RAID-1 with two enterprise disks: 1:10^30
--
three consumer disks is less expensive than two enterprise disks. it will be faster. in the event of a single disk failure, redundancy is maintained. however, having an extra disk will be louder and consume more power.
oops, i bought the wrong disks.
i think i wanted 3 TB disks.
:[
i think i wanted 3 TB disks.
:[
> having an extra disk will be louder and consume more power.
In general, consumer disks are less noisy. For example my old WD RE 500GB drives made a hell of a lot of noise compared to my WD 1.5TB GP drives.
Also, typical power usage in in the <5W range, I wouldn't worry about it.
In general, consumer disks are less noisy. For example my old WD RE 500GB drives made a hell of a lot of noise compared to my WD 1.5TB GP drives.
Also, typical power usage in in the <5W range, I wouldn't worry about it.
disklabel doesn't appreciate 3 TB HDDs.
i hope this was the correct way to use the disks:
i hope this was the correct way to use the disks:
gmirror label -vb round-robin gm0 /dev/ada4 /dev/ada5 gpart create -s GPT /dev/mirror/gm0 gpart add -t freebsd-ufs mirror/gm0 newfs -U /dev/mirror/gm0p1
> In general, consumer disks are less noisy.
BTW, I bought two 3 TB Ultrastar disks.
BTW, I bought two 3 TB Ultrastar disks.