Calling All Techies: Hard Drive Question

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry, accidentally posted this in the Customer forum at first - forgot where I was. Would a mod please delete my thread of the same name in the other forum - thanks.

 

It's time for me to add two 500 GB drives to my XP system. My primary concern is reliability (and yes, I do already fan cool my drives directly). A knowledgeable friend of mine has recommended:

 

Western Digital RE2 WD5000YS 500GB Serial ATA 3.0 Gb/s

 

as described here: Western Digital RE2 WD5000YS 500GB Serial ATA 3.0 Gb/s 7200RPM Hard Drive at ZipZoomfly

 

I know some here are IT folks. I'd love to hear from you as to what drives you feel have the best survival rates. I'm planning on mirroring the two drives so that one backs up the other. I do build my own computers but consider myself quite ignorant when it comes to IT.

 

Many thanks,

 

Sean

[philipotto]

Sean, as long as you go with a reputable manufacture, id est, Hitachi, Maxtor, Seagate, Western Digital, I don't think there is one that is really more reliable than another.

Sure, there are people who have had good experiences and people who have had catastrophic drive failures with each.

The most important thing is to backup, and to backup again. So if a drive goes, it's only inconvenience, and doesn't involve data loss.

 

If your budget permits, I would recommend stepping up to the HITACHI 750GB SATA 7200 RPM 32MB.

The advantage of this drive over the Western Digital you are looking at is the 32MB cache, vs 16mb.

 

Zip Zoom Fly is selling them for $215, the cheapest price incidentally of the retailers listed on Hitachi's website.

 

 

Cheers,

Philip

[johnjs]

Sean,

Here is an excellent resource for all things HDD: StorageReview.com

Lately, I use an external Lacie drive for backup and I leave it off and unplugged from both the computer (a notebook) and the power. RAID is a great way to go for automating your backup or for increasing your system speed as well. The key thing to remember is that all HDD's will eventually fail, but I'm sure like everything else, reliability is improving all the time.

best, John

[toyfel]

Very good advice from Philip and John. Mirrored RAID and extra cooling is a good idea to minimize risks. Not sure if its still the case but there can be quite significant differences in warranty times between different brands. Of course, in case of disk failure the financial loss is rather unimportant compared to loss of data, but still worthwhile considering.

[carstenw]

I agree with the good manufacturers, but there are still worse and better drives, and I would not add Maxtor to the list of reliable manufacturers. I know too many people who have had one die in the last few years, as have I myself. Western Digital or Samsung is what I buy at the moment. I have been buying the consumer WD RAID edition drives recently, but the Samsung Spinpoint is meant to be great too. If you buy two to mirror each other, don't buy them together! Drives from the same batch tend to die together. Buy one from one store, and another from another store, as far removed as you can. Maybe one east-coast, one west-coast

 

Google, who have more drives than anyone, did a large-scale experiment (thousands and thousands of drives under controlled conditions) and we able to dispell a whole series of traditional hard drive wisdoms, one of which was that temperature affects drive reliability. Their paper on the subject was a real eye-opener and blows previous research out the window. A simple search should find it.

[dugby]

Hi Sean, I'm an advocate of the old 'Real estate' addage.....location...location....location

 

My first copy of images are on my portable 80GB Vosonic 6210 Multimedia Viewer.

 

Next my images are copied to my Raided NAS box at home. For this I use 2x 500GB Samsung SATA2 in a RAID1 (ie Mirrored) configuration in a D-LINK DNS-323 network attached storage (aka NAS), this is quite a low cost 2nd step.

 

Finally as the NAS box is very portable, not much bigger than a 6-pack ( and i'm not referring to NAIM-Audio 6 packs), it gets carried into my office where the data is transferred to LTO tape cartridges (on to Primary and Copy storage pools) which are the most reliable storage medium.

 

I know a lot of people do not have access to such technology. However the message I bring is ... 3 copies in multiple locations....... and NO CDs or DVDs....I will not enter into any debates on CDR and DVD/R, but they do not (and will not) form any part of my data management strategy.

[ericperlberg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

. A knowledgeable friend of mine has recommended:

 

Western Digital RE2 WD5000YS 500GB Serial ATA 3.0 Gb/s

 

as described here: Western Digital RE2 WD5000YS 500GB Serial ATA 3.0 Gb/s 7200RPM Hard Drive at ZipZoomfly

 

 

Sean

 

I use these drives. Like your friend, I would also recommend them.

 

Disk drives are rated by a testing method called Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF). It's probably only a rough guide as there are many "in use" variables which aren't factored in but these drives have a high MTBF. Secondly, manufacturers rate their drives by collequalial terms and the ones built to the most robust tolerances with the highest standards are called "enterprise" quality meaning you can bet your business on them. Of course you can't. But these Western Digital drives are Enterprise quality.

 

I had one of my WD Caviar drives go bad on me recently. So much for MTBF. I would and have bought more WD Caviar drives because I still feel that "chances are" they're as robust as you can get but I "know" that a drive can still go bad even with the best of design and intentions.

 

Personally I prefer to move to smaller drives. They're a bit more pricey per GB. Since I "know" that a drive can go bad, I'd rather put a smaller amount of data at risk at any one failure than more data. So if it costs me 10% more to buy two 250 gig drives, I still prefer to risk 3 months of data than 6 months of data.

 

Additionally, you need a good backup strategy. How good depends on how important your data is to you. As an amateur, I back up nightly. When an internal disk is full I copy the HD to a very large (1tb) external HD which I use for access to my archives and take the internal Caviar SATA drive and put it away for storage in a safe, dry, not overly warm storage area. I would not count on this drive lasting more than 5 years. Hopefully someone will invent a more compelling storage medium in the meantime. When the external drive where I keep my "active" archive fills I get another one and keep both out and ready for active use. This allows me to have a stored drive that doesn't get any handling or use at all while still having access to my archives for like when I sell some images or need access to them for putting together a book, etc.

 

As you have work related data you might want to think about more elaborate onsite and off site redundancy. While drives aren't inexpensive, they're a lot cheaper than losing critical data.

[pierovitch]

MTBF is not an exact science. Risk management is the name of the data survival game. Drives do not usually both die at the same time unless external factors occur. some of these are. A power surge common to both drives. a common drive controller or raid controller failing and scrambling both disks (not uncommon). fire,flood, or other rare physical threat. One internal and one external is a good compromise with one stored in a safe place until used for scheduled backups.

An external drive can also help with drive recovery.

[sean_reid]

Thanks very much for all of the suggestions. I'm mulling them over and would welcome additional thoughts as I imagine this topic affects most of us on the list. I do backup and use off site storage. I do strongly suspect that not all drives are created equal with respect the reliability.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[carstenw]

The RE WD drives are a good suggestion. RE means RAID Edition, and these are meant to use more robust technology for longevity and for the heavier use a drive gets when RAIDed.

[marknorton]

I think drive manufacturers are a bit like airlines - you can find people with good and bad experiences of each. When it comes to drive reliability, it's a bit of a lottery because there's variability between manufacturers, between models from the same manufacturer and, as Carsten says, between samples of the same drive and we don't have access to the numbers to make a judgment.

 

Reliability is in theory going to get better over time, but there's conflicting pressures of ever reducing cost and ever increasing capacity.

 

I use Seagate Barracuda and Hitachi laptop drives, in each case, the hardened versions suitable for continuous operation. I don't worry over much about temperature as much as I do about temperature cycling, so I tend to keep them running all the time.

 

I divide my data between my "working set" and "archive". The "working set" of each PC - current projects, installed software, OS gets backed up each night to a separate spindle on the server, a full backup on the 1st of the month and an incremental each night. I maintain 3 months of backups so that I can go back to any end-of-day in the last 3 months, useful if I find I have accidentally deleted a file.

 

Archive data, which would otherwise increase the size of the backup to unmanageable proportions, is moved off the main systems onto two NAS RAID-5 arrays in different buildings.

[sean_reid]

"I don't worry over much about temperature as much as I do about temperature cycling, so I tend to keep them running all the time."

 

I do the same thing. I realize that choosing any given hard drive involves some gambling but its interesting to know what people's experiences have been. I don't seem to be finding anyone who has bad things to say about Seagate.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[marknorton]

I've always found Seagate to be excellent - my 2 NAS RAID-5 boxes have 8 Seagate Barracudas between them.

[sean_reid]

I've always found Seagate to be excellent - my 2 NAS RAID-5 boxes have 8 Seagate Barracudas between them.

 

Which specific 500GB Seagate model would you recommend (using two for mirrored RAID)? I've also gotten e-mails recommending Seagate. Some people seem very happy with Western Digital enterprise drives and some seem less happy. Happy to hear from anyone else who has been using the RE2s.

 

Thanks,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

I agree with the good manufacturers, but there are still worse and better drives, and I would not add Maxtor to the list of reliable manufacturers. I know too many people who have had one die in the last few years, as have I myself. Western Digital or Samsung is what I buy at the moment. I have been buying the consumer WD RAID edition drives recently, but the Samsung Spinpoint is meant to be great too. If you buy two to mirror each other, don't buy them together! Drives from the same batch tend to die together. Buy one from one store, and another from another store, as far removed as you can. Maybe one east-coast, one west-coast

 

 

That's interesting Carsten. Thanks, I'll try to do that.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[brucek]

Sean:

 

Is this for long-term backup and access or more for day-to-day operation? I ask because for me my answer (or approach) would differ depending upon the desired end result.

 

For long term backup I can't say enough good things about RAID systems. I have an Infrant Technology RAID 5 system that has served me well. For a 1TB (4 drive) networked chassis I get about 650GB of storage. I've already had a drive fail but I lost no files whatsoever. I simply put in a spare drive I had waiting for just such a time and then gave the system an hour or two to get its act back together.

 

For day-to-day operation I have a couple of USB and Firewire enclosures that I have a couple of different sized Western Digital drives. I have no recent experience with Seagate drives but I have a LOT of recent bad experience with Maxtors.

 

And then I also have two 350GB WD My Book USB and Firewire drives that I have my images copied to that are off site.

 

It may sound paranoid but I'm finding that one can never have too many backups of anything. <sigh>

 

I hope this helps.

 

Bruce

[harrisfoto]

Why not build a cheap server, and avoid adding drive space to your existing system?

What I have been doing, is going to the used computer store, and buying a good used system. In one case I bought a compaq, in the other, I used my old windows 2k system.

I then installed a hard drive controller card. You can install 1 or 2 of these. Each card will handle 4 additional drives.

 

You can use windows 2k or Linux (I use Mandriva) That way I have a lot of drive space.

You can link the systems together with a router, and have a home network.

This works great where family or office others use laptops and other computers.

 

You can keep addiing more cheap computers, or recycling the obsolete ones and adding more storage space, without constantly upgrading your primary computer.

 

We will all need more space soon -- 20+ Megs per shot will soon be the norm.

Want specifics let me know.

[marknorton]

Which specific 500GB Seagate model would you recommend (using two for mirrored RAID)? I've also gotten e-mails recommending Seagate. Some people seem very happy with Western Digital enterprise drives and some seem less happy. Happy to hear from anyone else who has been using the RE2s.

 

Thanks,

 

Sean

 

Sean,

 

I'm using 4 Seagate 500Gbyte drives, model number ST3500641NS. Looks like this model has been superceded by ST3500630NS

 

Seagate Technology - Barracuda® ES SATA 3.0/Gb/s 400-GB Hard Drive

 

[Even though the link says 400Gb, it's actually 500Gb]

[harmsr]

Sean,

 

I have had very good experience with both the Western Digital & Seagate lines.

 

A suggestion for backup and storage is what I recently built.

 

An NAS enclosure with 4 drive bays set-up as RAID 5.

Each bay has a 500 GB drive.

 

Effective available storage is 1.35 TB due to the RAID 5 structure, but I won't lose any data if a drive fails. The system is set-up to email me if a drive fails, and I can just replace it without data loss.

 

Do a google search on RAID 5. It may also be the way you want to set-up your storage, but you need 3+ drives.

 

Best,

 

Ray

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jrgeoffrion]

Sorry, accidentally posted this in the Customer forum at first - forgot where I was. Would a mod please delete my thread of the same name in the other forum - thanks.

 

It's time for me to add two 500 GB drives to my XP system. My primary concern is reliability (and yes, I do already fan cool my drives directly). A knowledgeable friend of mine has recommended:

 

Western Digital RE2 WD5000YS 500GB Serial ATA 3.0 Gb/s

 

as described here: Western Digital RE2 WD5000YS 500GB Serial ATA 3.0 Gb/s 7200RPM Hard Drive at ZipZoomfly

 

I know some here are IT folks. I'd love to hear from you as to what drives you feel have the best survival rates. I'm planning on mirroring the two drives so that one backs up the other. I do build my own computers but consider myself quite ignorant when it comes to IT.

 

Many thanks,

 

Sean

 

1 - I have this exact drive and paid $89.99 shipped less than one month ago (http://www.newegg.com).

 

2 - From reading between the lines, I see that you are probably planning a RAID array to mirror your internal drive. That's what I used to do and I'm now totally against it. This is what I now do.

 

a) I have my "working files" on a single drive.

These files are "mirrored" at 11:20am everyday to an similar internal drive (that's the time at which I go pick-up the kids).

c) On a weekly basis, I back-up everything to the external 500Gb drive in an Antec MX-1 eSATA enclosure.

d) On a monthly basis, I repeat c) on a different external drive.

 

The RAID array needs to be "managed" while this automatic software-based solution allows you more control over which directories get copied, which file types, etc. For example, in my case, I never copy my TIFF files since they are intermediate files (I only keep the raw, settings, and the final PSDs).

 

In addition, my staggered back-ups are very useful in case of inadvertently overwriting a file. It happens from time to time that I resize a PSD and inadvertently save the PSD in the small version. The problem is that you may no realize you did this until you re-open the file a week later. This is where the weekly or monthly back-up come handy.

 

Anyway, that's my $0.02 and it works for me.