klionnova.blogg.se - Backblaze hard drive reliability 2020

I miss the days after the Thailand floods when Backblaze would drive around the US grabbing every consumer hard drive they could find on store shelves and shucking them. Posted on May 21st 2020, 12:27 Reply #32 zlobbyĬhrispy_I've stopped caring about Backblaze reports because they no longer use a very wide range of drives and the only drives with enough datapoints to give a reasonable idea of reliability are enterprise drives. I don't see any WD simply because the storage vendors I use (HP, Nimble, Imation, Dell) don't tend to sell WD.Ī 1.5% AFR is nothing out of the oridinary and for the market that any of those enterprise disks target, AFR is not even in the top 3 things buyers are looking for in a mechanical drive. You expect to replace a few disks a year and for those that I replace myself I see a pretty even spread of HGST, Seagate, Toshiba. You buy your storage, you throw a whole bunch together into failure-tolerant arrays with hot-spares and then you have backups of those arrays.ĭISKS WILL DIE. Meanwhile, consumers tend to be buying NAS drives like WD Reds and Ironwolf models.Īs an enterprise datacenter user, reliability is kind of a moot point. They're using mostly noisy, hot, expensive enterprise capacity drives. Now, the backblaze reports aren't really drives that we as consumers care about. We used to see a huge cross section of the consumer hard drive market - reliability stats that simply didn't exist anywhere else. I've stopped caring about Backblaze reports because they no longer use a very wide range of drives and the only drives with enough datapoints to give a reasonable idea of reliability are enterprise drives.

Apr 29th 2022 Seagate Technology Reports Fiscal Third Quarter 2022 Financial Results (0)Īdd your own comment 32 Comments on Backblaze Releases Hard Drive Stats for Q1 2020 - Seagate Worst Performer 26 to 32 of 32 Go to 2 Previous Next #26 kapone32.

May 4th 2022 Seagate Introduces New Collectible External Drives Inspired by the Star Wars Galaxy (4).

Jul 22nd 2022 Seagate Technology Reports Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2022 Financial Results (0).

Aug 2nd 2022 Phison Debuts the X1 to Provide the Industry's Most Advanced Enterprise SSD Solution (4).

Aug 2nd 2022 Seagate Addresses Hyperscale Workloads with New Enterprise-Class Nytro SSDs Optimized to Lower TCO (7).

Aug 31st 2022 Seagate Revises Fiscal First Quarter 2023 Outlook (0).

Sep 8th 2022 Seagate Launches Next-Generation Exos X Storage Arrays (0).

Aug 31st 2022 Seagate Shoots Out Collectible Spider Man FireCuda HDDs (5).

Oct 27th 2022 Seagate Technology Reports Fiscal First Quarter 2023 Financial Results (10).

Jul 18th 2022 Hard Disk Drive Shipments Down by Over 30 Percent Year on Year (31).

All of the drives listed were installed during this timeframe. The reporting period is from April 2013 through December 31, 2019. The table below shows the lifetime failure rates for the hard drive models we had in service as of March 31, 2020. We use 60 drives as a minimum as there are 60 drives in all newly deployed Storage Pods. When we report quarterly, yearly, or lifetime drive statistics, those models with less than 60 drives are not included in the calculations or graphs. For example, we have: 20 Toshiba 16 TB drives (model: MG08ACA16TA), 20 HGST 10 TB drives (model: HUH721010ALE600), and 20 Toshiba 8 TB drives (model: HDWF180). There were 195 drives (129,959 minus 129,764) that were not included in the list above because they were used as testing drives or we did not have at least 60 drives of a given model. In both cases, the 0% AFR for the quarter is impressive. If the 8 TB model had 1 (one) failure in the quarter, the AFR would only be 0.40% and the 12 TB model would have an AFR of just 0.26% with 1 (one) failure for the quarter. On the contrary, both of the HGST drives with 0 (zero) failures in the quarter have a reasonable number of drive days, so the AFR is less volatile. Similarly, the Toshiba 4 TB drive AFR would be 4.05% with just one failure in the quarter.

For example, if just one Seagate 16 TB drive had failed, the AFR would be 7.25% for the quarter. As a consequence, the AFR can range widely from a small change in drive failures. None of the Toshiba 4 TB and Seagate 16 TB drives failed in Q1, but both drives had less than 10,000 drive days during the quarter. In addition, the Q1 2020 AFR is significantly lower than the Q1 2019 AFR which was 1.56%.ĭuring this quarter 4 (four) drive models, from 3 (three) manufacturers, had 0 (zero) drive failures.

That is the lowest AFR for any quarter since we started keeping track in 2013. The Annualized Failure Rate (AFR) for Q1 2020 was 1.07%.