Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

RAID5 on 3 legs! What leg should I get?

68 posts in this topic

Posted

Hello,

Yes I know the title isn't funny :p

My RAID5 had one if its 3TB HDDs die today (I have a backup) so I was gonna use Seagate's warranty to replace it....

Well, this one is out of warranty so I guess I have to buy a brand new one. Since I use this (currently) for RAID5 storage, I think Im going to go a bit better quality HDD this time....

At work we use WD Red's line which seems pretty OK with the data we move/store....I currently have these ST3000DM001 which at the time I bought because they were the cheapest and I did not work.

Now I can buy something better for the long run. I can get the ST3000DM001 for 97 euros but for 118 euros I can get the WD30EFRX.

Should I go with the WD30EFRX (I know Ill get lower performance from the drive as it will go with the highest performance the ST3000DM001 can) or should I go with another ST3000DM001?

Kinda of a ASAP thing as even though Ive turned off the PC with the RAID5, I don't wanna just leave it there semidead...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The Seagate equivalent of the WD Red is the ST3000VN000.

Any particular reason you aren't considering this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The Seagate equivalent of the WD Red is the ST3000VN000.

Any particular reason you aren't considering this?

Forget about the expensive drives go for RAID6 double parity with an enterprise grade controller (With battery backed cache). It'll give you greater availability without the expensive drives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Forget about the expensive drives go for RAID6 double parity with an enterprise grade controller (With battery backed cache). It'll give you greater availability without the expensive drives.

 

Not sure I'd describe either WD Red and Seagate NAS drives as expensive.

Not like they're Constellations, or RE4s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

The Seagate equivalent of the WD Red is the ST3000VN000.

Any particular reason you aren't considering this?

No idea Seagate even had a NAS line....

The ST3000VN000 is at 119

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

In a odd strange of events, today Seagate telephone service is closed because they celebrate a "company holiday". What "company holiday"?

Anyways, Ill call them tommorow to comfirm what warranty they have on the drive. If it aint 3, Im going with the WD Red...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

In a odd strange of events, today Seagate telephone service is closed because they celebrate a "company holiday". What "company holiday"?

Anyways, Ill call them tommorow to comfirm what warranty they have on the drive. If it aint 3, Im going with the WD Red...

US is Martin Luther King Day....it is a Federal Holiday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._Day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

US is Martin Luther King Day....it is a Federal Holiday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._Day

AFAIK, Ive called the Seagate support HERE, not the US one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

AMAZING. The level that I am PO right now is huge....

I called Seagate's presale department, tell them that I wanted to know the warranty of the ST3000VN000, Seagate's NAS line. They asked me a bunch of irrelevent questions such as email, my name, my number (which at that stage I just didnt feel like giving them). After all that, she actually has the....arg....to tell me that by model number she cannot tell me how many years of warranty I have because she needs a serial number, not a model number. I said, well this is presales so I obviously do not have a serial number. The reason Im calling is because this is presale and Im trying to decide between your drive and the competition's. She puts me on hold and tells me again that she needs a serial number but those drives usually have 2-3 years warranty but she cant tell me for sure.

WD Red; Here I come :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

I do see that the WD Red is 5400rpm while the ST3000DM001 .....will my disks suffer from this since all the rest are 7200?

I dont want to damage the rest of the drives by making them work way slower than what they are made.

Also: http://hdd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/WD-Red-3TB-vs-Seagate-Barracuda-720014-3TB/1386vs1374

Hmm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I would have a rethink on the storage solution with large drives. RAID5 with this size drivesisn't necessarily the best solution any more. I would look at this site and plug your numbers in, http://www.raid-failure.com/raid5-failure.aspx and see what you get.

 

Other good reads.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/storage/why-raid-5-stops-working-in-2009/162

http://www.smbitjournal.com/2012/05/when-no-redundancy-is-more-reliable/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

How about the hitachi Deskstar 7k4000 or 7k3000 in your case. Code HDS720xxxxx640

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

I do see that the WD Red is 5400rpm while the ST3000DM001 .....will my disks suffer from this since all the rest are 7200?

I dont want to damage the rest of the drives by making them work way slower than what they are made.

Also: http://hdd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/WD-Red-3TB-vs-Seagate-Barracuda-720014-3TB/1386vs1374

Hmm...

 

They won't really work slower though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I have a NAS running 4x Seagate ST3000DM001 in RAID5, just like you. Before the Seagates I had Hitachi, and before that I had WDs.

I would not recommend mixing drives in the NAS, be it in size or in speed.

If you read the forums and compatibility notes for many NASs, they also never recommend eco drives, usually those running at 5400RPM. Reason being that they go into power-standby and then drop out of the RAID. Read the compatibility list of HDDs for your NAS.

 

If you put in a drive that only runs at 5400RPM and all the others run at 7200RPM, yes, it will suffer, of course. The seek and transfer times are less on the 5400 than on the others. Plus, will it even work together? Imagine pulling a carriage with 4 horses, where three of them are fine and running and one of them is old and can only walk.

 

In my opinion, if I had to replace a drive in a NAS I would either buy the same one again or replace all of them. The only exception being if you use the drives as individual drives in the NAS and not as RAID.

 

There are drives made for 24/7 use in NAS which obviously would be more suited. However, if these cost a lot more than the regular 7200, and the regular ones are on the compatibility list, I would stick to those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

I would have a rethink on the storage solution with large drives. RAID5 with this size drivesisn't necessarily the best solution any more. I would look at this site and plug your numbers in, http://www.raid-failure.com/raid5-failure.aspx and see what you get.

 

Other good reads.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/storage/why-raid-5-stops-working-in-2009/162

http://www.smbitjournal.com/2012/05/when-no-redundancy-is-more-reliable/

Im switching in a few months to a non RAID5 solution.

 

 

They won't really work slower though.

Hardware wise I imagine they will still work at 7200 and 5400, but wouldn't the transfer be like a 5400 drive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

Im gonna go with the ST3000DM001 because, even though the WD are made for NAS, its cheaper, faster and its a 2 year warranty vs a 3 year for a price difference that isnt all that worth it.

BTW, thanks to those that convinced me; I was gonna order a WD Red but I dont have the security details to my card to order online here at my workplace so I didnt order it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

I have a NAS running 4x Seagate ST3000DM001 in RAID5, just like you. Before the Seagates I had Hitachi, and before that I had WDs.

I would not recommend mixing drives in the NAS, be it in size or in speed.

If you read the forums and compatibility notes for many NASs, they also never recommend eco drives, usually those running at 5400RPM. Reason being that they go into power-standby and then drop out of the RAID. Read the compatibility list of HDDs for your NAS.

I don't have a NAS; Im just working with a RAID card right now.

 

If you put in a drive that only runs at 5400RPM and all the others run at 7200RPM, yes, it will suffer, of course. The seek and transfer times are less on the 5400 than on the others. Plus, will it even work together? Imagine pulling a carriage with 4 horses, where three of them are fine and running and one of them is old and can only walk.

There is no reason it wouldn't work. At the end of the day they are HDDs. They will just work at the weaker power (be it sata speeds, space, etc)

 

In my opinion, if I had to replace a drive in a NAS I would either buy the same one again or replace all of them. The only exception being if you use the drives as individual drives in the NAS and not as RAID.

 

There are drives made for 24/7 use in NAS which obviously would be more suited. However, if these cost a lot more than the regular 7200, and the regular ones are on the compatibility list, I would stick to those.

I usually leave my PC on 24/7 to quickly access files, TV if I need something, etc.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't have a NAS; Im just working with a RAID card right now.

 

 

What RAID card? Proper RAID cards drop consumer level drives as well due to not responding quickly enough.  There are firmware differences in Enterprise and NAS drives that makes this less likely to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So how long ago did this drive drop out of your array? I got your pm about it 2 days ago, how is the replacement not here already yet, you do understand that if another one drops files are gone.

I would of thought as soon as disk failed in your array you would of gone to the store and replaced it, or ordered next day delivery online. This discussion on what you should get has been going on too long IMHO

Not really sure why all the discussion over 20 euro/quid/dollars difference.. If you want the RED, buy the RED - if you don't want to spend the extra 20, then get the seagate. As to the point of disks dropping from array, thought that would be moot anyway since thought your plan was going to just using drivepool? As you stated before you only have a few gig of critical files. And storing parity for all 9TB of space is kind of waste of drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

What RAID card? Proper RAID cards drop consumer level drives as well due to not responding quickly enough.  There are firmware differences in Enterprise and NAS drives that makes this less likely to happen.

Software one (can't tell you 100% the model but there is a thread about it somewhere). Basically bought it just in case in the future I change systems.

 

 

So how long ago did this drive drop out of your array? I got your pm about it 2 days ago, how is the replacement not here already yet, you do understand that if another one drops files are gone.

A day before this thread was created. Yup, but I have a update to date backup of all my important and critical data. If another one fails, all I lose is replacable data (which much I dont really need actually) .

Oh and of course, the PC is turned off.

I would of thought as soon as disk failed in your array you would of gone to the store

Well when this happened, it was sunday, so impossible. Yesterday was monday and we got into this discussion of which drive. Today, I was gonna get a red (making a mistake) but I didnt have my card's security measures with me (they ask for a letter in a chart). Now, at midday, I went to a store and they didnt have any 3TB and on top of that they didnt have any Seagate.

Not really sure why all the discussion over 20 euro/quid/dollars difference.. If you want the RED, buy the RED - if you don't want to spend the extra 20, then get the seagate. As to the point of disks dropping from array, thought that would be moot anyway since thought your plan was going to just using drivepool?

Changing to DrivePool now when going to move these disks to another PC (well, server) is kind of pointless right now. Ill do that as soon as I order it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I just put in a PO for a Constellation drive from Seagate. They're like $120 on Amazon now, it's insane!

 

 

This is for a spare set of disks for our RAID 5 array, we have a main set, 2 backup sets, and now a spare set just incase there's a mechanical issue we can continue to run backups without losing the redundant backup.

 

At home I have a seagate "NAS" drive and a Samsung Spinpoint in my NAS. I've never been a fan of WD, so naturally I'd suggest the Seagate ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

Finally ordered the drive (ST3000DM001). Thanks to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Unless you have a hardware level RAID-5 with a battery backup, I would recommend something like ZFS with RAID-Z1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hello,

http://blog.backblaze.com/2014/01/21/what-hard-drive-should-i-buy/

And this is why life sucks.... :( Buy something, find out the next day some better is around. Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.