Synology will always advise that you use Enterprise HDD.
One thing I've always wondered is what makes these enterprise drives better, yet they just have the damn rotating disks like the others...
Enterprise hard disk are just consumer hard disk with ECC (raid 2 in the drive firmware disabled ). The reason being if error correction is enabled, the drive take longer to acknowledge to the system's RAID that all is well. The RAID card do reject drives that are taking long to respond. In another word, the enterprise HDD are damned down hard disk. And the stupid vendors do actually price it up while its actually inferior to consumer drives In short, unless you are going to use them behind a RAID card, ignore Synology advice. They just want to make cash off you. Oh and one other thing. Avoid Seagate drives. They have buggy firmware that kill their drives. Google if you doubt it Muriithi
On 4 February 2014 15:54, Kevin G. Chege <kevin.chege@gmail.com> wrote:
be careful of the drives you select too. I found out the hard way,
luckily
nothing vital was lost:
http://techreport.com/news/25940/hard-drive-reliability-study-names-names
I avoid WD drives because their failure rate is too high - personal experience. So the post by Kevin Chege kinds left me asking myself where it is I am wrong - not just went wrong - with WD! On 4 February 2014 18:06, William Muriithi <william.muriithi@gmail.com>wrote:
Synology will always advise that you use Enterprise HDD.
One thing I've always wondered is what makes these enterprise drives better, yet they just have the damn rotating disks like the others...
Enterprise hard disk are just consumer hard disk with ECC (raid 2 in the drive firmware disabled ). The reason being if error correction is enabled, the drive take longer to acknowledge to the system's RAID that all is well. The RAID card do reject drives that are taking long to respond. In another word, the enterprise HDD are damned down hard disk. And the stupid vendors do actually price it up while its actually inferior to consumer drives
In short, unless you are going to use them behind a RAID card, ignore Synology advice. They just want to make cash off you.
Oh and one other thing. Avoid Seagate drives. They have buggy firmware that kill their drives. Google if you doubt it
Muriithi
On 4 February 2014 15:54, Kevin G. Chege <kevin.chege@gmail.com> wrote:
be careful of the drives you select too. I found out the hard way,
luckily
nothing vital was lost:
http://techreport.com/news/25940/hard-drive-reliability-study-names-names
_______________________________________________ skunkworks mailing list skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke ------------ List info, subscribe/unsubscribe http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks ------------
Skunkworks Rules http://my.co.ke/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=94 ------------ Other services @ http://my.co.ke
-- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 "I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler."
@Wash - research has shown that WD disks have very low failure rates - I can't remember the link - but Seagate have way higher failure rates than WD. I can't remember which disk had the lowest of them all - they actually test 3 types over a very long period of time. Sorry, I won't google that for you :-) ./Ok3ch On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo@gmail.com>wrote:
I avoid WD drives because their failure rate is too high - personal experience. So the post by Kevin Chege kinds left me asking myself where it is I am wrong - not just went wrong - with WD!
On 4 February 2014 18:06, William Muriithi <william.muriithi@gmail.com>wrote:
Synology will always advise that you use Enterprise HDD.
One thing I've always wondered is what makes these enterprise drives better, yet they just have the damn rotating disks like the others...
Enterprise hard disk are just consumer hard disk with ECC (raid 2 in the drive firmware disabled ). The reason being if error correction is enabled, the drive take longer to acknowledge to the system's RAID that all is well. The RAID card do reject drives that are taking long to respond. In another word, the enterprise HDD are damned down hard disk. And the stupid vendors do actually price it up while its actually inferior to consumer drives
In short, unless you are going to use them behind a RAID card, ignore Synology advice. They just want to make cash off you.
Oh and one other thing. Avoid Seagate drives. They have buggy firmware that kill their drives. Google if you doubt it
Muriithi
On 4 February 2014 15:54, Kevin G. Chege <kevin.chege@gmail.com> wrote:
be careful of the drives you select too. I found out the hard way,
luckily
nothing vital was lost:
http://techreport.com/news/25940/hard-drive-reliability-study-names-names
_______________________________________________ skunkworks mailing list skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke ------------ List info, subscribe/unsubscribe http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks ------------
Skunkworks Rules http://my.co.ke/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=94 ------------ Other services @ http://my.co.ke
-- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 "I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler."
_______________________________________________ skunkworks mailing list skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke ------------ List info, subscribe/unsubscribe http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks ------------
Skunkworks Rules http://my.co.ke/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=94 ------------ Other services @ http://my.co.ke
I believe all this info is here http://blog.backblaze.com/ This is rather comprehensive and what I gathered is that they are mostly the same with Hitachi being the most reliable. On Tuesday, 4 February 2014, Okechukwu <okechukwu@gmail.com> wrote:
@Wash - research has shown that WD disks have very low failure rates - I can't remember the link - but Seagate have way higher failure rates than WD. I can't remember which disk had the lowest of them all - they actually test 3 types over a very long period of time. Sorry, I won't google that for you :-)
./Ok3ch
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','odhiambo@gmail.com');>
wrote:
I avoid WD drives because their failure rate is too high - personal experience. So the post by Kevin Chege kinds left me asking myself where it is I am wrong - not just went wrong - with WD!
On 4 February 2014 18:06, William Muriithi <william.muriithi@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','william.muriithi@gmail.com');>
wrote:
Synology will always advise that you use Enterprise HDD.
One thing I've always wondered is what makes these enterprise drives better, yet they just have the damn rotating disks like the others...
Enterprise hard disk are just consumer hard disk with ECC (raid 2 in the drive firmware disabled ). The reason being if error correction is enabled, the drive take longer to acknowledge to the system's RAID that all is well. The RAID card do reject drives that are taking long to respond. In another word, the enterprise HDD are damned down hard disk. And the stupid vendors do actually price it up while its actually inferior to consumer drives
In short, unless you are going to use them behind a RAID card, ignore Synology advice. They just want to make cash off you.
Oh and one other thing. Avoid Seagate drives. They have buggy firmware that kill their drives. Google if you doubt it
Muriithi
On 4 February 2014 15:54, Kevin G. Chege <kevin.chege@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kevin.chege@gmail.com');>>
wrote:
be careful of the drives you select too. I found out the hard way,
luckily
nothing vital was lost:
http://techreport.com/news/25940/hard-drive-reliability-study-names-names
_______________________________________________ skunkworks mailing list skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke');> ------------ List info, subscribe/unsubscribe http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks ------------
Skunkworks Rules http://my.co.ke/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=94 ------------ Other services @ http://my.co.ke
-- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 "I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler."
_______________________________________________ skunkworks mailing list skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke');> ------------ List info, subscribe/unsubscribe http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks ------------
Skunkworks Rules http://my.co.ke/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=94 ------------ Other services @ http://my.co.ke
-- Regards, Mark Mwangi markmwangi.me.ke
Purchasing a server for purely backup would not be the best use of resources, as most servers, even enter-levels one can do much more that backup.
That's correct. You can always find a old desktop and as long as it has enough sata interface, don't see any harm. Well, I agree its more power hungry and a big plus for arm based NAS.
I second the Synology NAS solution. They have one of the most nimble and intuitive web interface, and a solid OS for the NAS systems. Plus the storage options are limitless, and you can configure your setup in a way that suites your needs.
I hate web interfaces. Easy to set up initially but a freaking pain to maintain. What happen if something isn't working right? You don't have logs, you can't increase verbosity, you are left looking at a useless web page with useless error message. Web interface are just good for consumer stuff, where the set up remain relatively basic. Second, most don't offer SSH access so you can't use rsync for backup.
Plus you can do other staff with the Synology if you are small office; DNS, DHCP, Media Server, Downloads, Antivirus.
Agree , but would still rather have a bit more control. Just my humble opinion.
Muriithi
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Peter Mugoh <pkmugoh@gmail.com> wrote:
You can get him on josyveros@gmail.com
Wonder why guys are not thinking latest tech...check out StorSimple solution that gives you a hybrid solution for data back up and security. Backs up data both on premise and on the Cloud. You will save 60-80% of your cost. If you didn't know, now your know...more info here *http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/storsimple/ <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/storsimple/>* regards, Paul. On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 9:28 PM, William Muriithi <william.muriithi@gmail.com
wrote:
Purchasing a server for purely backup would not be the best use of resources, as most servers, even enter-levels one can do much more that backup.
That's correct. You can always find a old desktop and as long as it has enough sata interface, don't see any harm. Well, I agree its more power hungry and a big plus for arm based NAS.
I second the Synology NAS solution. They have one of the most nimble and intuitive web interface, and a solid OS for the NAS systems. Plus the storage options are limitless, and you can configure your setup in a way that suites your needs.
I hate web interfaces. Easy to set up initially but a freaking pain to maintain. What happen if something isn't working right? You don't have logs, you can't increase verbosity, you are left looking at a useless web page with useless error message.
Web interface are just good for consumer stuff, where the set up remain relatively basic.
Second, most don't offer SSH access so you can't use rsync for backup.
Plus you can do other staff with the Synology if you are small office; DNS, DHCP, Media Server, Downloads, Antivirus.
Agree , but would still rather have a bit more control. Just my humble opinion.
Muriithi
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Peter Mugoh <pkmugoh@gmail.com> wrote:
You can get him on josyveros@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ skunkworks mailing list skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke ------------ List info, subscribe/unsubscribe http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks ------------
Skunkworks Rules http://my.co.ke/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=94 ------------ Other services @ http://my.co.ke
-- "Change is slow and gradual. It requires hardwork, a bit of luck, a fair amount of self-sacrifice and a lot of patience." Roy.
participants (5)
-
Mark Mwangi -
Odhiambo Washington -
Okechukwu -
Paul Roy -
William Muriithi