From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bill Davidsen Subject: Re: OT: Tips for good hard drives for a home server Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:55:33 -0500 Message-ID: <491CA255.4070402@tmr.com> References: <3ECBDC05781B3D48ABD520A01ABF2F9B299C974A5A@SE-EX008.groupinfra.com> <7d86ddb90811120619vca13676tb0192676ece0cb93@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <7d86ddb90811120619vca13676tb0192676ece0cb93@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ryan Wagoner Cc: "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-raid.ids Ryan Wagoner wrote: > I used to buy Seagate drives for their 5 year warranty. However with > the capacities increasing like they are the 5 vs 3 years doesn't > really matter as much. Out of the 4 Seagate drives (2 160GB and 2 > 320GB) in my server that are 2.5 years old, the one is already showing > 13 reallocated sectors. This might be due to non Barracuda drives > being certified for only 8 hours a day. > Note that Seagate makes two similar but not quite drives in many capacities. As example the drives ending with "AS" or "A" are desktop, and those ending with "NS" are for server use. Now the recent "ES" line shows 7x24 for the duty cycle, and 1.2M hours MTBF. I doubt you will have a problem with longevity. The 500GB runs <$100, the TB ~ $210. These are probably a good fit with your budget and reliability needs. Anyone who has a pointer to information on the "write same" command for raid which Seagate mentions, or what the "SV" line of drives actually offer could enlighten us. -- Bill Davidsen "Woe unto the statesman who makes war without a reason that will still be valid when the war is over..." Otto von Bismark