I don't have much to say about NASes (I have an always-on server) but I'm curious why you're comparison shopping for drive reliability.
If you're buying HDDs by the thousand it might make a difference to your TCO, but you certainly shouldn't try to buy reliable hard drives to avoid failure. They will fail. But you know that :-)
And absolutely, a few percentage points here or there in failure rate chance is going to be completely unnoticeable to me. The BackBlaze data isn't much relevance to me - not only is their use case quite difference, all of the ones they tested look pretty reliable. But the difference between an 11% failure rate and a 49% failure rate as reported by Which? is very much material - or even between 11% and 26%. (Though I'm not sure I trust that data entirely - and of course it's out of date.)
Sure, I want to be in a position where I can recover from losing a disk, but if I can reduce my chances of having to go through that faff from one in two to one in nine, I'll take it, as long as other things are more or less equal.
I'll probably be buying mainly on usability and price. The reliability data was stuff I had to hand and wanted to gather together. It turns out that reliability doesn't look like a big consideration - but that's on the basis of this data.
Comments 5
If you're buying HDDs by the thousand it might make a difference to your TCO, but you certainly shouldn't try to buy reliable hard drives to avoid failure. They will fail. But you know that :-)
Reply
Reply
Reply
And absolutely, a few percentage points here or there in failure rate chance is going to be completely unnoticeable to me. The BackBlaze data isn't much relevance to me - not only is their use case quite difference, all of the ones they tested look pretty reliable. But the difference between an 11% failure rate and a 49% failure rate as reported by Which? is very much material - or even between 11% and 26%. (Though I'm not sure I trust that data entirely - and of course it's out of date.)
Sure, I want to be in a position where I can recover from losing a disk, but if I can reduce my chances of having to go through that faff from one in two to one in nine, I'll take it, as long as other things are more or less equal.
I'll probably be buying mainly on usability and price. The reliability data was stuff I had to hand and wanted to gather together. It turns out that reliability doesn't look like a big consideration - but that's on the basis of this data.
Reply
Leave a comment