Re: question about the best suited RAID level/layout

[Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>]

On 7/5/2013 7:46 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 20:12 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
...
> btw: It was interesting to see,... that all 3 different drives (from WD,
> HGST, Seagate)... exported _exactly_ the same amount of space.

You did state these are all enterprise class drives.

>> ... I don't leave
>> hot/warm/cold spares in the chassis.
...
>>   This simply degrades performance.

> Why should it? If the spare is unused?

The answer is rather obvious.  If spares are in the chassis one has
fewer active array spindles.

>> 2.  HGST is a brand created due to Western Digital's acquisition of
>> Hitachi Data System's disk drive unit.

> Sure... but I think they still use their own technology/firmware... at
> least for now?

For now.

>>   The drives are Hitachi's final
>> production units relabeled with a different name and serial number.
>> Three years from now when that HGST drive fails, Western Digital will
>> replace it with a Western Digital produced drive.

> Sure about that? Wasn't there some agreement that HGST belongs to WD but
> produces independently...?

That wouldn't make sense for either party.  Where did you read this?
Got a link?

> and Toshiba got something from the
> WD/HGST trade and already announced a 3.5" enterprise disk out of that.

Toshiba has been producing 3.5" enterprise drives for years.  Got a link
showing that Toshiba received technology from the WD/Hitachi acquisition?

>> IMO the practical disadvantages of using dissimilar drives outweighs the
>> theoretical benefits.

> So... which are the practical disadvantages?

I already stated many of them.  You don't seem to be following along
very well.

-- 
Stan