TGFC Lifestyle - Powered by Discuz! Board

标题: 三大品牌普通硬盘的故障率终于有靠谱的对比数据了 [打印本页]

作者: nick2119 时间: 2016-7-25 21:33 标题: 三大品牌普通硬盘的故障率终于有靠谱的对比数据了

posted by wap, platform: Chrome
smzdm上有网友给的链接，美国一个数据中心的人自己统计的，希捷故障率得令我肝儿颤，幸亏我的大多是4T的dm000，希捷的3T和1.5T是重灾区啊。接合使用日期来看，WD的红盘也阵亡率过高。妈的还是日本人靠谱，谁知道哪里能买到日立HGST的4T/6T 5200转硬盘

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/best-hard-drive/
What is the Best Hard Drive?January 21st, 2015

It was one year ago that I first blogged about the failure rates of specific models of hard drives, so now is a good time for an update.
At Backblaze, as of December 31, 2014, we had 41,213 disk drives spinning in our data center, storing all of the data for our unlimited backup service. That is up from 27,134 at the end of 2013. This year, most of the new drives are 4 TB drives, and a few are the new 6 TB drives.Hard Drive Failure Rates for 2014
Let’s get right to the heart of the post. The table below shows the annual failure rate through the year 2014. Only models where we have 45 or more drives are shown. I chose 45 because that’s the number of drives in a Backblaze Storage Pod and it’s usually enough drives to start getting a meaningful failure rate if they’ve been running for a while.
Backblaze Hard Drive Failure Rates Through December 31, 2014
Name/Model Size Number
of Drives Average Age
in years Annual
Failure Rate 95% Confidence
Interval
HGST Deskstar 7K2000
(HDS722020ALA330) 2.0 TB 4,641 3.9 1.1% 0.8% – 1.4%
HGST Deskstar 5K3000
(HDS5C3030ALA630) 3.0 TB 4,595 2.6 0.6% 0.4% – 0.9%
HGST Deskstar 7K3000
(HDS723030ALA640) 3.0 TB 1,016 3.1 2.3% 1.4% – 3.4%
HGST Deskstar 5K4000
(HDS5C4040ALE630) 4.0 TB 2,598 1.8 0.9% 0.6% – 1.4%
HGST Megascale 4000
(HGST HMS5C4040ALE640) 4.0 TB 6,949 0.4 1.4% 1.0% – 2.0%
HGST Megascale 4000.B
(HGST HMS5C4040BLE640) 4.0 TB 3,103 0.7 0.5% 0.2% – 1.0%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11
(ST31500341AS) 1.5 TB 306 4.7 23.5% 18.9% – 28.9%
Seagate Barracuda LP
(ST31500541AS) 1.5 TB 1,505 4.9 9.5% 8.1% – 11.1%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14
(ST3000DM001) 3.0 TB 1,163 2.2 43.1% 40.8% – 45.4%
Seagate Barracuda XT
(ST33000651AS) 3.0 TB 279 2.9 4.8% 2.6% – 8.0%
Seagate Barracuda XT
(ST4000DX000) 4.0 TB 177 1.7 1.1% 0.1% – 4.1%
Seagate Desktop HDD.15
(ST4000DM000) 4.0 TB 12,098 0.9 2.6% 2.3% – 2.9%
Seagate 6 TB SATA 3.5
(ST6000DX000) 6.0 TB 45 0.4 0.0% 0.0% – 21.1%
Toshiba DT01ACA Series
(TOSHIBA DT01ACA300) 3.0 TB 47 1.7 3.7% 0.4% – 13.3%
Western Digital Red 3 TB
(WDC WD30EFRX) 3.0 TB 859 0.9 6.9% 5.0% – 9.3%
Western Digital 4 TB
(WDC WD40EFRX) 4.0 TB 45 0.8 0.0% 0.0% – 10.0%
Western Digital Red 6 TB
(WDC WD60EFRX) 6.0 TB 270 0.1 3.1% 0.1% – 17.1%

Notes:
The total number of drives in this chart is 39,696. As noted, we removed from this chart any model of which we had less than 45 drives in service as of December 31, 2014. We also removed Storage Pod boot drives. When these are added back in we have 41,213 spinning drives.
Some of the HGST drives listed were manufactured under their previous brand, Hitachi. We’ve been asked to use the HGST name and we have honored that request.

at Is A Drive Failure For Backblaze
A drive is recorded as failed when we remove it from a Storage Pod for one or more of the following reasons:
The drive will not spin up or connect to the OS.
The drive will not sync, or stay synced, in a RAID Array.
The Smart Stats we use show values above our thresholds.

Sometimes we’ll remove all of the drives in a Storage Pod after the data has been copied to other (usually higher-capacity) drives. This is called a migration. Some of the older pods with 1.5 TB drives have been migrated to 4 TB drives. In general, migrated drives don’t count as failures because the drives that were removed are still working fine and were returned to inventory to use as spares.
This past year, there were several pods where we replaced all the drives because the RAID storage was getting unstable, and we wanted to keep the data safe. After removing the drives, we ran each of them through a third-party drive tester. The tester takes about 20 minutes to check the drive; it doesn’t read or write the entire drive. Drives that failed this test were counted as failed and removed from service.Takeaways: What are The Best Hard Drives
4 TB Drives Are Great
We like every one of the 4 TB drives we bought this year. For the price, you get a lot of storage, and the drive failure rates have been really low. The Seagate Desktop HDD.15 has had the best price, and we have a LOT of them. Over 12 thousand of them. The failure rate is a nice low 2.6% per year. Low price and reliability is good for business.
The HGST drives, while priced a little higher, have an even lower failure rate, at 1.4%. It’s not enough of a difference to be a big factor in our purchasing, but when there’s a good price, we grab some. We have over 12 thousand of these drives.

Where are the WD 4 TB Drives?
There is only one Storage Pod of Western Digital 4 TB drives. Why? The reason is simple: price. We purchase drives through various channel partners for each manufacturer. We’ll put out an RFQ (Request for Quote) for say 2,000 – 4 TB drives, and list the brands and models we have validated for use in our Storage Pods. Over the course of the last year, Western Digital drives were often not quoted and when they were, they were never the lowest price. Generally the WD drives were $15-$20 more per drive. That’s too much of a premium to pay when the Seagate and HGST drives are performing so well.
3 TB Drives Are Not So Great
The HGST Deskstar 5K3000 3 TB drives have proven to be very reliable, but expensive relative to other models (including similar 4 TB drives by HGST). The Western Digital Red 3 TB drives annual failure rate of 7.6% is a bit high but acceptable. The Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 3 TB drives are another story. We’ll cover how we handled their failure rates in a future blog post.
Confidence in Seagate 4 TB Drives
You might ask why we think the 4 TB Seagate drives we have now will fare better than the 3 TB Seagate drives we bought a couple years ago. We wondered the same thing. When the 3 TB drives were new and in their first year of service, their annual failure rate was 9.3%. The 4 TB drives, in their first year of service, are showing a failure rate of only 2.6%. I’m quite optimistic that the 4 TB drives will continue to do better over time.
6 TB Drives and beyond: Not Sure Yet
We’re beginning the transition from using 4 TB to using 6 TB drives. Currently we have 270 of the Western Digital Red 6 TB drives. The failure rate is 3.1%, but there have been only 3 failures. The statistics give a 95% confidence that the failure rate is somewhere between 0.1% and 17.1%. We need to run the drives longer, and see more failures, before we can get a better number.
We have just 45 of the Seagate 6 TB SATA 3.5 drives, although more are on order. They’ve only been running a few months, and none have failed so far. When we have more drives, and some have failed, we can start to compute failure rates.
Which Hard Drive Should I Buy?
All hard drives will eventually fail, but based on our environment if you are looking for good drive at a good value, it’s hard to beat the current crop of 4 TB drives from HGST and Seagate. As we get more data on the 6 TB drives, we’ll let you know.
What About The Hard Drive Reliability Data?
We will publish the data underlying this study in the next couple of weeks. There are over 12 million records covering 2014, which were used to produce the failure data in this blog post. There are over 5 million records from 2013. Along with the data, I’ll explain step by step how to compute an annual failure rate.
Related Posts
How Long Do Disk Drives Last?
Hard Drive Temperature, Does it Matter?

作者: dizhang 时间: 2016-7-25 21:36

说一千道一万，归根结底，重要的文件不同的硬盘多备份几份吧

作者: 原始恶魔 时间: 2016-7-25 21:36

网上啊，美亚啊。注意要买有正规包装不要买散装的就行。散装的虽然看上去便宜一点直面数据差不多其实都是服务器上拆下来的旧货，必定会有问题，没问题人家也不会拆下来不是。

作者: fatehe 时间: 2016-7-25 21:48

我用东芝！

作者: yangjuniori 时间: 2016-7-25 21:59

posted by wap, platform: Chrome
let me cc

作者: johentai 时间: 2016-7-25 22:04

posted by wap, platform: Chrome
我们设备上都用日立硬盘，根据德国佬的经验，日立靠得住。

作者: ffcactus 时间: 2016-7-25 22:05

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
百毒的同学也说日立最靠谱

作者: kleiber 时间: 2016-7-25 22:39

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
希捷那个45％返修？太夸张了吧

作者: KARUTO 时间: 2016-7-25 22:47

日立不就是以前的ibm硬盘部么

作者: gogo798fd 时间: 2016-7-25 22:57

我自己也挂了两个希捷的3T硬盘，所以说希捷不靠谱啊

作者: anubisx 时间: 2016-7-25 23:03

日立的东西的确稳定，我们的CRS存取一体机也是日立的最稳定可靠。

作者: wdf312 时间: 2016-7-25 23:04

HGST 4T好贵的！

作者: jzhl 时间: 2016-7-25 23:48

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
日立虽然不错，但是我觉得日立的硬盘很吵。

作者: dorn 时间: 2016-7-25 23:58

黑盘最靠谱，除了价格

作者: unsword 时间: 2016-7-26 00:00

最近用了三块东芝的了，现在觉得就东芝最靠谱

作者: alexey 时间: 2016-7-26 00:41

说过几百遍，希捷的民用级已经废了。
多花点钱买监控级的希捷保平安。对自己精心收集的数据就看得那么贱么？

作者: segasnkps 时间: 2016-7-26 00:44

posted by wap, platform: Galaxy S7 Edge
希捷用了不到两年就挂，唯一挂的。。。

作者: yangjuniori 时间: 2016-7-26 01:50

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
有低转速型号么

作者: 去日留痕 时间: 2016-7-26 02:25

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
希捷ST3000DM001一生黑

作者: grammyliu 时间: 2016-7-26 02:34

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
机械硬盘只用黑盘

作者: vermilion 时间: 2016-7-26 06:57

posted by wap, platform: 红米Note2
楼主转的时候没看发帖时间吧
这个文章有好久了，本版应该贴过

作者: 加州IT男 时间: 2016-7-26 07:27

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
HGST难道不是WD旗下的？

作者: giant 时间: 2016-7-26 07:31

posted by wap, platform: iPhone

引用:

原帖由 @KARUTO 于 2016-7-25 22:47 发表
日立不就是以前的ibm硬盘部么

当年硬盘还是ibm发明的吧？

作者: smokesnake 时间: 2016-7-26 08:24

posted by wap, platform: Android

引用:

原帖由 @jzhl 于 2016-7-25 23:48 发表
日立虽然不错，但是我觉得日立的硬盘很吵。

寻道声音特别大，刚买的时候我还以为买到坏的，用到现在5年了都习惯了，233

作者: lewx 时间: 2016-7-26 08:58

posted by wap, platform: iPhone

引用:

原帖由 @原始恶魔于 2016-7-25 21:36 发表
网上啊，美亚啊。注意要买有正规包装不要买散装的就行。散装的虽然看上去便宜一点直面数据差不多其实都是服务器上拆下来的旧货，必定会有问题，没问题人家也不会拆下来不是。

服务器的是时间一到就拆下不管有无问题

作者: cp251 时间: 2016-7-26 09:20

posted by wap, platform: Samsung
帮楼主贴出来源，貌似一字不差，楼主好手段！

作者: dcfly 时间: 2016-7-26 10:37

日立存储被东芝收购了，现在市面上的东芝就是以前的日立

作者: wsldu 时间: 2016-7-26 11:30

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
希捷一生黑

作者: beta_child 时间: 2016-7-26 19:59

买了东芝3t放电影，只读少写，希望多撑几年

作者: bavon 时间: 2016-7-26 20:19

posted by wap, platform: 红米Note2
希捷这么差吗，看选希捷的人也很多啊

作者: jun4rui 时间: 2016-7-26 20:23

posted by wap, platform: Samsung
日本盘靠谱都一年以上了啊。NAS装了两个日本盘

作者: 多乐士 时间: 2016-7-26 20:29

3块ST3000DM001 1年全坏，还好买的蓝德代理的。全部换新后又1年多，又全坏了。。。。。。。。。

作者: ninggu2008 时间: 2016-7-26 21:05

posted by wap, platform: Android
希捷1t，刚过保修期2年，就开始参数警告，过不久彻底不认盘。

作者: 11508721 时间: 2016-7-26 21:11

posted by wap, platform: Firefox
只买单碟硬盘，哪有那么多破事儿

作者: hyh 时间: 2016-7-26 21:28

我以前不信邪，大多用希捷，结果前后坏了5块3t的。。。。。。

作者: daonciun 时间: 2016-7-26 21:35

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
大日本了不起啊

作者: alfreds 时间: 2016-7-26 21:48

弱问家用机械盘的存在意义？

作者: reeve 时间: 2016-7-26 22:50

posted by wap, platform: iPad
St3000dm001受害者路过。见一次黑一次。

作者: RuaruaruA 时间: 2016-7-26 23:02

看来以后要用日立

作者: byemilan 时间: 2016-7-26 23:22

我去，三块希捷3t快3年居然没一块坏的，有点中奖的感觉

作者: 幽灵胖胖 时间: 2016-7-26 23:24

posted by wap, platform: 红米Note3
固态镁光，9000小时没问题……
仓库东芝3t的p300*4，早死早超生……

作者: yangjuniori 时间: 2016-7-27 03:28

posted by wap, platform: Chrome
数据安全可不是闹着玩的

作者: momou 时间: 2016-7-27 09:06

是不是又是那家数据中心的？
当时说日立的硬盘损坏率低不是应为后期才换的，跟早起的希捷根本不是在同一起跑线上。

日立和东芝的硬盘好像一直不是多么靠谱，只不过用希捷和WD的人比较多用日立和东芝的人比较少，所以给人感觉好像希捷和WD的坏的多。

Hardware.fr 2015下半年法国通路硬件返修报告榜上HDD返修率：
HDD—机械硬盘恭喜东芝蝉联N次冠军
- Seagate 0,60% (上季度 0,68%)
- HGST 0,81% (上季度 1,16%)
- Western 0,90% (上季度 1,09%)
- Toshiba 0,96% (上季度 1,34%)

作者: 弟弟等等 时间: 2016-7-27 10:46

是不是日本企业用的轴承钢纯度比较高？？？

作者: hwj10ten 时间: 2016-7-27 10:52

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
喷了，不懂这事。看了一下6.18买的3t希捷盘……

作者: rick6 时间: 2016-7-27 10:52

posted by wap, platform: 小米5
希捷2t的怎么样，我希捷500g和1t的各一块，用了好几年也没啥问题。

作者: blood 时间: 2016-7-27 10:54

艹，我nas里4块3t红盘，哭了

作者: gintonic 时间: 2016-7-27 11:02

6.18的时候比较再三，还是买了希捷的4T没买它的3T，看来运气好一点？

作者: Alloyo 时间: 2016-7-27 13:09

posted by wap, platform: Firefox

引用:

原帖由 @dcfly 于 2016-7-26 10:37 发表
日立存储被东芝收购了，现在市面上的东芝就是以前的日立

ibm硬盘部门被日立收购了,现在市面上的日立就是以前的deskstar

作者: danman 时间: 2016-7-27 13:27 标题: 回复 1# 的帖子

这个公司的数据每年被拿出来炒作一次。实际上这个统计有很多问题，有一系列文章批驳过，可惜从来每人转。。。

作者: momou 时间: 2016-7-27 18:53

引用:

原帖由 danman 于 2016-7-27 13:27 发表
这个公司的数据每年被拿出来炒作一次。实际上这个统计有很多问题，有一系列文章批驳过，可惜从来每人转。。。

是的，我就在驱家看过一次，好像好多转这个文章的都在吹日立与东芝的HDD多么靠谱，可是事实上正相反

记错了，应该是别的网站吧

http://storage.yesky.com/426/35906426.shtml

[ 本帖最后由 momou 于 2016-7-27 19:03 编辑 ]

欢迎光临 TGFC Lifestyle (http://bbs.tgfcer.com/)