[SATLUG] NAS HD recommendation

Todd W. Bucy todd at bucy-medrano.me
Wed May 22 05:47:06 CDT 2013


I'd the drives you are going to use are 2.5 inch then I would have to
recommend the Seagate momentus xt series.  Its a far and reliable.   Also
for a nas solution I would have to recommend freenas.  Easy to set up and
maintain.

Todd
On May 21, 2013 10:39 PM, "Brad Knowles" <brad at shub-internet.org> wrote:

> On May 21, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Alex Bartonek <bartonekdragracing at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm looking at finally putting together my home NAS.  Its a 1U rack
> mount, 6 SATA ports, 1 will have a 2.5" 320gb boot drive, then 4 slots for
> 3TB xxxx brand hard drives.
> >
> > I was thinking the "WD Red NAS" drives.  I'm going to leave it running
> 24/7 so I didnt want to run regular SATA drives since I at least want some
> sort of durable drive and it will be in a RAID config running CentOS.
>
> I have personally had bad experiences with Western Digital drives, so I
> wouldn't buy them again.  I've also had failures with Seagate drives, but
> not to anywhere close to the same failure ratio.
>
> If you're Google or Amazon, then you can take advantage of the fact that
> "consumer" grade drives don't appear to have any detectable large-scale
> failure rate that is statistically greater than the "enterprise" grade
> drives.  Just buy a few gazillion drives and make your storage systems
> sufficiently redundant -- Google used to use a "triple store" mechanism
> years ago, but I don't know what they're using now.
>
> Of course, the key to building a really reliable storage system is to
> ensure that you never actually have to "rebuild" the array, because that is
> when the array will be under the greatest level of stress and you are most
> likely to have a secondary failure.  Just mark the bad drive as bad, use
> your existing additional copies of the data to re-generate new good copies
> to make up for the loss in redundancy, and then when the bad drive is
> replaced and a new drive is added, you let nature take its course.
>
> Of course, you'll want to thin-provision the storage you provide from that
> array, too.
>
>
> If you're not Google or Amazon, then you've got a harder task ahead of
> you, because the "second failure while rebuilding" problem is highly likely
> to bite you when you do ultimately have a drive failure.
>
> I wouldn't get the full "triple store" redundancy that Google was doing
> years back, but with ZFS and RAID-Z over the zspools, I could get the same
> basic effect as a traditional RAID array, but integrated directly into the
> filesystem in such a way that rebuilds are less painful and more easily
> managed.
>
> --
> Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>
> LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> SATLUG mailing list
> SATLUG at satlug.org
> http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to manage/unsubscribe
> Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
>


More information about the SATLUG mailing list