From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Stefan_/*St0fF*/_H=FCbner?= Subject: Re: WD20EARS data Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:13:27 +0200 Message-ID: <4BB0DFB7.9080302@stud.tu-ilmenau.de> References: <4BAB8D41.4010801@gmail.com> <4BABA12D.6040605@shiftmail.org> <4BAF8185.9040307@gmx.net> <4BB0DC78.5080506@stud.tu-ilmenau.de> Reply-To: st0ff@npl.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4BB0DC78.5080506@stud.tu-ilmenau.de> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linux RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids Am 29.03.2010 18:59, schrieb Stefan /*St0fF*/ H=FCbner: > Hi @all, >=20 > I tested the WD20EARS at work today. They correctly report NO SCT ER= C > ability (unlike WDxxEADS from November 2009 on). Trying the commands > nevertheless results in "command aborted". >=20 > So my recommendation would be: if you need a fast large array and wan= t > to use WD, keep enough redundancy and a cold spare. (Respectively > because I returned 2 drives to Western Digital today, too. They had > reallocated and pending sectors >100 and already dropped out of RAIDs= =2E) >=20 > Or use Hitachi deskstar HDS722020ALA330 - these can set ERC timeouts = and > they cost about the same. We have sold about 10 times as many Hitach= is > compared to WDs, but had about the same amount of defective drives. I'm sorry, the comparison is with the elder WD20EADS! Sorry... >=20 > All the best, > Stefan > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid"= in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html