linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk>
To: John Stoffel <john@stoffel.org>, Linux-RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: WD Red vs Black drives for RAID1
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:07:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <564A1B60.8050708@youngman.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <22090.1097.258820.65463@quad.stoffel.home>

On 16/11/15 16:28, John Stoffel wrote:
> 
> Guys,
> 
> I'm starting to get tons of errors on my various mixed 1 and 2Tb
> drives I have in a bunch of RAID 1 mirrors, generally triple mirrors.
> It's time to start replacing them and I think I want to either go with
> the WD Black 4Tb or the WD Red 4Tb drives.  And with a pair of 500Gb
> SSDs to use with lvmcache for speedup.
> 
> Any comments?
> 
I'm running Seagate Barracudas in a mirror (probably similar to the
Blacks). I haven't come across reports of problems IN A MIRROR
CONFIGURATION.

However, I want to go Raid 5 (or 6) at some point, and all the advice is
DON'T BUY DESKTOP DRIVES (ie Barracudas, Blacks, Greens) if that's the
route you're planning on going down. So I've got to replace my
Barracudas :-(

If you want to go 5 or 6 (which might get you better response speeds too
- I don't know), then Reds are your only choice. (Or Seagate NAS,
because I'm a Seagate guy that's the route I might go.)

Because desktop drives don't support proper error recovery, it's all too
easy for what should be a little problem to trash the array - if you
follow the list I'd say well over half the "help my array is trashed"
threads here are caused because the person used desktop drives.

The price difference isn't *that* much - I suspect a lot of people here
will say if reliability trumps performance, pay extra for Red or NAS drives.

Cheers,
Wol

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-11-16 18:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-16 16:28 WD Red vs Black drives for RAID1 John Stoffel
2015-11-16 17:05 ` Another Sillyname
2015-11-16 17:35   ` John Stoffel
2015-11-16 17:27 ` Jens-U. Mozdzen
2015-11-16 17:32   ` John Stoffel
2015-11-16 17:44     ` Jens-U. Mozdzen
2015-11-17  5:04       ` Brad Campbell
2015-11-16 17:45 ` Robert L Mathews
2015-11-16 19:50   ` John Stoffel
2015-11-16 18:07 ` Wols Lists [this message]
2015-11-16 18:28 ` Phil Turmel
2015-11-16 19:52   ` John Stoffel
2015-11-16 20:02     ` Phil Turmel
2015-11-16 20:16       ` John Stoffel
2015-11-16 20:55       ` Wols Lists

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=564A1B60.8050708@youngman.org.uk \
    --to=antlists@youngman.org.uk \
    --cc=john@stoffel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).