![]() ![]() Lucas Mearian covers storage, disaster recovery and business continuity, financial services infrastructure and health care IT for Computerworld. The company said it will continue to measure the performance of its drives and release data periodically on those metrics. We think this is related to vibration," Backblaze stated. Both of these drives start accumulating errors as soon as they are put into production. "The drives that just don't work in our environment are Western Digital Green 3TB drives and Seagate LP (low power) 2TB drives. Western Digital, while performing the best on average, also suffered hits on some of specific drives as well. "The bigger Seagate drives have continued the tradition of the 1.5TB drives: they're solid workhorses, but there is a constant attrition as they wear out." Their overall failure rate isn't great, but it's not terrible either," the company stated. "We've been running them for a long time - their average age is pushing 4 years. Not all Seagate drives performed so poorly.īackblaze said it has been happy with Seagate's Barracuda LP 1.5TB drives. It averaged only a 0.8-year lifespan, which gave it an annual failure rate of 120%.Īnnual failure rates over a four-year period. The drive model with the highest failure rate was Seagate's 1.5TB Barracuda Green (ST1500DL003). 09% failure rate with an average lifetime of 1.7 years. The second highest in reliability was also a Hitachi drive, the Deskstar 5K3000 (HDS5C3030ALA630) it also had a. Topping the list for reliability was Hitachi's 3TB Deskstar 7K3000 (HDS723030ALA640) with a 0.9 percent failure rate and an average lifetime of about 2.1 years. It listed 15 different drive models from Western Digital, Seagate and Hitachi. ![]() The company included specific drive models and their capacities in their results. A failure is when a drive in a pod must be replaced, the company said. It's also important to note that Backblaze is using the drives in an environment that sees far more input and output activity than the average desktop or laptop computer would produce the drives are continuously in use in what is an enterprise-class environment.īackblaze measured reliability by looking at the annual failure rate, which is the average number of failures you can expect running one drive for a year. ![]() "Having said that, you'll notice that even after 3 years, by far most of the drives are still operating." The Seagate drives start strong, but die off at a consistently higher rate, with a burst of deaths near the 20-month mark," Backblaze wrote in its official blog. ![]() There is an initial die-off of Western Digital drives, and then they are nice and stable. Even so, some of the individual Hitachi models topped the reliability charts.Īnnual failure rate based on manufacturer and capacity. The results from three years of use were revealing: Western Digital's drives lasted an average of 2.5 years, while Hitachi's and Seagate's lasted 2 and 1.4 years, respectively. It only used 58 drives from Toshiba and 18 from Samsung. For example, the company used 12,765 Seagate drives, 12,956 Hitachi drives and 2,838 Western Digital drives. The company filled the Storage Pods with drives from Seagate, Hitachi and Western Digital it also used drives from Toshiba and Samsung, but their numbers were so small as to be statistically insignificant. Each Pod stores up to 180TB in a 4U rack-mounted configuration. A storage pod is an array of RAIDed disks made up by either 2.5 or 3.5-in, hard drives used to storage customer data. At the end of 2013, Backblaze had 27,134 consumer-grade drives spinning in Storage Pods. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |