Jump to content



Photo

RAID5 on 3 legs! What leg should I get?


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#46 +Odom

Odom

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 09-August 06

Posted 07 March 2014 - 17:31

Thank you very much, I'll go through that thread.




#47 OP +riahc3

riahc3

    Neowin's most indecisive member

  • Tech Issues Solved: 11
  • Joined: 09-April 03
  • Location: Spain
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: HTC Desire Z

Posted 07 March 2014 - 23:07

Hello,

Thank you very much, I'll go through that thread.

Proper credit goes to BudMan, not me :)

#48 daorbed9

daorbed9

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 10-May 13
  • Location: NC

Posted 07 March 2014 - 23:43

I don't mean to highjack the thread, maybe someone can just give a quick explanation. But if so many of you do not recommend RAID5, what would you recommend instead?

Reason I'm asking is that I also have a RAID5 with 3TB and 4TB drives. Had a RAID5 for years with always the biggest drives and never had problems with rebuilds.

 

Imo using multiple raid-1's is a very good choice for consumer/small business.  It keeps everything simple.  Even when raid breaks you still have the data as a single drive.  Speed is more than enough at 100+ MBs on modern drives to satisfy a GB network adapter.  If you use teamed adapters then you are beyond a simple non-hardware raid server based system.  With raid-1 unless you have a very high i/o you won't really need a hardware controller.  It will always help but it all depends on what you want to pay vs the reward/risk.



#49 +BudMan

BudMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 89
  • Joined: 04-July 02
  • Location: Schaumburg, IL
  • OS: Win7, Vista, 2k3, 2k8, XP, Linux, FreeBSD, OSX, etc. etc.

Posted 09 March 2014 - 13:01

Reason I'm asking is that I also have a RAID5 with 3TB and 4TB drives. Had a RAID5 for years with always the biggest drives and never had problems with rebuilds.

 

So how many rebuilds have you had to do over the years?  Also curious how much data do you have on these 3 and 4 TB drive arrays -- 4TB drives have not been out all that long.. You have 4TB drives in an array and have done so many rebuilds because of failures that you can say you never have problems?

 

The problem with the rebuild on large drives is error rate and having to read lots of data - if your large arrays are not very full, they are not reading much data on rebuld.  Why do you feel your having so many failures would be my other question..  Is this a place of work, or your home that you have all these large arrays..

 

I am very curious to what you store on them that you feel justifies the added cost of parity?



#50 Athlonite

Athlonite

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 02-April 07
  • Location: New Zealand

Posted 10 March 2014 - 06:45

I'd also look into why the drive failed is it a duff cable HDD getting to hot I only ask this because I run RAID0 and nothing else and over the last ten years have only ever had one HDD fail (WD2500AAJS) and that was just through share age not heat or cable or power issues 



#51 OP +riahc3

riahc3

    Neowin's most indecisive member

  • Tech Issues Solved: 11
  • Joined: 09-April 03
  • Location: Spain
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: HTC Desire Z

Posted 10 March 2014 - 08:55

Hello,

I'd also look into why the drive failed is it a duff cable HDD getting to hot I only ask this because I run RAID0 and nothing else and over the last ten years have only ever had one HDD fail (WD2500AAJS) and that was just through share age not heat or cable or power issues

Luck; Really theres nothing AFAIK to prove that one brand is better than another.

A few months ago Hitachi was said to be the most reliable brand! Figure that!

#52 Mindovermaster

Mindovermaster

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 9
  • Joined: 25-January 07
  • Location: /USA/Wisconsin/
  • OS: Mint Debian LMDE
  • Phone: HTC ONE V

Posted 10 March 2014 - 14:06

Hello,
Luck; Really theres nothing AFAIK to prove that one brand is better than another.

A few months ago Hitachi was said to be the most reliable brand! Figure that!

 

Hitachi is dead. WD bought them out. So, in theory, yes, WD/Hitachi is a good brand now.



#53 OP +riahc3

riahc3

    Neowin's most indecisive member

  • Tech Issues Solved: 11
  • Joined: 09-April 03
  • Location: Spain
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: HTC Desire Z

Posted 10 March 2014 - 14:18

Hello,

Hitachi is dead. WD bought them out. So, in theory, yes, WD/Hitachi is a good brand now.

http://www.neowin.ne...-leads-the-pack

giphy.gif

#54 Mindovermaster

Mindovermaster

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 9
  • Joined: 25-January 07
  • Location: /USA/Wisconsin/
  • OS: Mint Debian LMDE
  • Phone: HTC ONE V

Posted 10 March 2014 - 15:12

Then soon Hitachi drives will be obsolete as they are owned by WD. And WD is right behind them.



#55 Athlonite

Athlonite

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 02-April 07
  • Location: New Zealand

Posted 11 March 2014 - 00:35

at the rate Seagate and Western Digital are sucking up HDD manufacturers it wont be long before it's just those two left and then there will be no competition which will drive the price up and the quality down  :(



#56 Praetor

Praetor

    ASCii / ANSi Designer

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 05-June 02
  • Location: Lisbon
  • OS: Windows Eight dot One dot One 1!one

Posted 11 March 2014 - 01:07

at the rate Seagate and Western Digital are sucking up HDD manufacturers it wont be long before it's just those two left and then there will be no competition which will drive the price up and the quality down  :(

 

actually the very fact that solid state hard drives are pumping up in the enterprise world means that those three players (these are the only players right now: Seagate, WD and Toshiba; Hitachi is owned by WD, altough operating and competing in the market) are gonna fade away if they aren't strong in the SSD field.

 

Mechanical disks are moving to the "things of the past", really.



#57 +snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

    Electrical & Computer Engineer

  • Tech Issues Solved: 29
  • Joined: 23-August 05
  • OS: Win/Lin/Bsd/Osx
  • Phone: dumb phone

Posted 11 March 2014 - 01:23

Just out of curiosity, anyone have thoughts on this: http://www.high-rely...ng-in-2009-not/ ?



#58 +LogicalApex

LogicalApex

    Software Engineer

  • Tech Issues Solved: 8
  • Joined: 14-August 02
  • Location: Philadelphia, PA
  • OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64
  • Phone: Nexus 5

Posted 11 March 2014 - 01:55

actually the very fact that solid state hard drives are pumping up in the enterprise world means that those three players (these are the only players right now: Seagate, WD and Toshiba; Hitachi is owned by WD, altough operating and competing in the market) are gonna fade away if they aren't strong in the SSD field.

 

Mechanical disks are moving to the "things of the past", really.

Mechanical HDDs aren't going anywhere for the foreseeable future. Especially in the enterprise market...

 

The Enterprise market still uses tape drives, for instance...

 

Solid State Drives will command a huge price premium over spinning disks for a long time. In the Enterprise space still matters... Solid State Drives also still don't have the write endurance that mechanical drives have. So they aren't the right choice for a large number of Enterprise workloads. They have a place, but they are no silver bullet.

 

Just out of curiosity, anyone have thoughts on this: http://www.high-rely...ng-in-2009-not/ ?

I formulated a response, but it was said far better here.



#59 +snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

    Electrical & Computer Engineer

  • Tech Issues Solved: 29
  • Joined: 23-August 05
  • OS: Win/Lin/Bsd/Osx
  • Phone: dumb phone

Posted 11 March 2014 - 02:34

I formulated a response, but it was said far better here.

Isn't that response against what you were saying earlier in the thread about 10^14 error rates (in WD Red) for RAID 5 almost certainly leading to a rebuild failure? I was under the same impression you were about rebuild failures until out of curiosity I searched and found the link I posted. Both what I linked and what you linked seem to come to the same conclusion that the probability can't be concluded using that math (my link due to them not finding those failure rates in practice, your link due to the assumptions being incorrect).



#60 T3X4S

T3X4S

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 28-October 13

Posted 11 March 2014 - 04:05

I would say either WD or Seagate's enterprise drives, but since its in a RAID 5 I would say try and get it as close as possible to the model of the other drives.