• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About blafarm

  • Rank
  1. Thank you for this review. I was wondering how the 1TB drive would stack-up to the Crucial 960GB M500. On a pure performance basis, Samsung is the clear winner. However, for Use Cases that actually include massive and frequent writes (like mine) -- I am pretty concerned about reliability. I wish there was a 'real world' method of quantifying the differences in that regard. At the same time, I find myself swapping-out SSD drives in about the third year of ownership due to capacity or speed improvements in newer models -- but I always find a way to repurpose the older drives. From that standpoint, I guess I'd only need to achieve three reliable years of performance before these drives would become largely EOL in my infrastructure.
  2. Wow. It took a long time for me to even remember this thread. Boy, times have changed. In the end, I believe I routed long internal SATA cables through a slotted backplane insert, and used SATA to eSATA adapters. I would say it worked quite well -- although I was never really comfortable with the mechanical "play" of the adapters. I would say that maybe 2 or 3 times, a drive would fall-off the array -- but I was never completely sure of the reason. When that happened, I rebooted the computer (having made sure the adapters were secure) and the RAID volume reappeared -- and I'm not sure the adapters were to blame. However, there many RAID solutions that will continue to view a volume as degraded when that happens -- even if all the drives are reinstated. Fortunately, my RAID solution was more tolerant. HTH
  3. Can't find these anywhere (2TB part) except from ServerSupply -- which seems to have a pretty bad reputation. Anyone have a line on where to buy these?
  4. Thanks. I have spent so much time researching this topic -- that I am now weighing the possibility of 3TB drives. If I wait any longer -- it will be 4TB drives.
  5. I've just finished copying a large quantity of files to 2 identical new 2TB Hitachi Enterprise A7K2000 HUA722020ALA330 hard drives. And, yet Windows 7 is reporting that the two drives have a 35GB difference in "Free Space". The drive Properties>General tab "agrees" on the drive capacity, the number of folders, the number of files and the amount of Used Space. But Properties>General tab reports an approximate 35GB difference in "Free Space" -- and so does Computer>Manage>Disk Management. The System folder shows as 0 Bytes. I have emptied the Recycle Bins on both drives -- and they show as empty. The Properties>General>Disk Cleanup -- indicates that there's nothing to cleanup. And, I've even used a third party application called Folder Match to confirm that the 2 drives have identical files. I know drives will sometimes remap bad sectors -- but these are unused and this is a 35GB difference. I ran Crystal Disk and it is reporting both drives as being in "Caution" mode -- with a yellow dot next to Reallocated Sector Count ... But they are both reporting the same amount -- and the application is not really supplying any additional information that I can understand. Anyone ever see this before -- or have an explanation for why this is happening. Are both of these drives toast -- or soon to be ??? With them both unused -- this would certainly be testing the laws of probability. Thanks for your input.
  6. Thanks very much for your reply Brian. I'd rather not pay the premium either -- but when the manufacturer clearly states at the bottom of their "Green" product page that: "WD Caviar Green Hard Drives are not recommended for and are not warranted for use in RAID environments..." "Please consider WD's Enterprise Hard Drives that are specifically designed with RAID-specific, time-limited error recovery (TLER..." "[which] are tested extensively in 24x7 RAID applications, and include features like enhanced RAFF technology and thermal extended burn-in testing." gives me great pause -- even if the warning is more directed at hardware-based RAID and HBA-based deployments. And, then when I do an search of "Green" drive buyer feedback on New Egg who have the word "RAID" in their posts -- and read their comments about general drive failure rates and RAID-related problems -- I become further dissuaded. My application is more mission critical -- and I'd rather spend the money on an enterprise drive that is designed for RAID -- than find myself chasing after a problem that I was so clearly warned to avoid. At any rate, my original question is really this: Are there any other highly-rated, low-power, low-heat, enterprise-level drives suitable for software RAID5 deployments that I should be seriously considering -- BESIDES the WD RE4-GP? Thanks very much for your assistance.
  7. I need to build several 4-Drive Linux-based servers that will be running software RAID5 using 2TB drives. My enclosures are small form factor Shuttle Computers -- so I'm looking for very low power-consumption and very low heat-generation. Drive reliability is of utmost importance -- and as much as I'd like to save money -- I simply can't do it at the cost of a higher data loss probability. I like the concept of the Caviar Green products -- but the manufacturer warns -- and users report -- a myriad of problems with RAID configurations. That product led me researching the WD RE4-GP -- but I can't find decent reliability reports on that drive. Are there any highly-rated, low-power, low-heat, enterprise-level drives suitable for software RAID5 deployments that I should be seriously considering for this application? I should probably also mention that these RAID units might need to operate in ambient temperatures reaching 100 degrees F. Thanks very much in advance for any and all advice.
  8. I know this isn't the hottest thread on this forum. But, I just found the solution to this problem and thought I'd post it for the next person who needs it. ICY DOCK MB882SP-1S-1B 2.5" to 3.5" SSD & SATA Hard Drive Converter - Black Read the reviews on NewEgg for more information.
  9. Well...looks like I spoke too soon. The NewEgg reviews of the product seems to indicate that the bracket does not provide standard 3.5 drive mounting holes. Therefore, it won't work with my hot swap tool-less drive bays on my RAID enclosure. Anyone else have any suggestions? Thanks.
  10. Thanks everyone for your replies and good suggestions. One of my challenges was that my RAID trays -- are actually "trayless" -- meaning they are quick mount shuttles that snap into the threaded side holes on either side of a 3.5 drive. However, I think I might have just found the solution at OCZ:
  11. Quick Question: I have a large, multi-drive SATA RAID enclosure that uses 3.5 drive trays for hot swapping drives. I'd like start benchmarking the performance of 2.5 SSD SATA drives in this enclosure. So, I'm looking for "adapters" that will allow a 2.5 SSD SATA drive to be mounted in a mock 3.5 housing -- with the requirement that the 2.5's SATA connector is in alignment with the position of where a 3.5 drive's SATA connector would be. The goal is to be able to install these mock 3.5 housings (populated with 2.5 SSDs) into my drive trays so that they can be used in my RAID enclosure. Has anyone run across this type of product? Thanks
  12. I hear you -- but visualize this wire path: [RAID Card] Internal Mini SAS to Internal SATA Fanout Female [sATA M-M Gender] Integrated HP Internal SATA Female [HP SATA Drivebay Backplane] Drive __DEVICE_______________________CABLE______________GENDER BENDER_______________CABLE__________________BACKPLANE________DRIVE Not a great topology for mission critical data.
  13. SATA is designed for 1m distance. If you run at 1.5 Gbps, you should be able to get more distance given the same drive and cabling. I could not find a mini-SAS to SATA cable. These guys have 0.25m cable. The shortest I have seem. Thank you for that. Yes, I had found the 0.25m product as well. I wish I didn't have a SATA "gender bender" in the mix. That's what's giving me the most anxiety.