We configured three of the HGST Deskstar NAS drives in a RAID-5 volume in the QNAP TS-EC1279U-SAS-RP. A CIFS share in the volume was subject to some IOMeter tests with access from up to 25 VMs simultaneously. The following four graphs show the total available bandwidth and the average response time while being subject to different types of workloads through IOMeter. IOMeter also reports various other metrics of interest such as maximum response time, read and write IOPS, separate read and write bandwidth figures etc. Some of the interesting aspects from our IOMeter benchmarking run are available here.
We see that the sequential accesses are still limited by the network link, but, this time, on the NAS side. On the other hand, our random access tests show markedly better performance for the 7200 rpm drives. The HGST Deskstar NAS manages to almost reach the performance levels of the Seagate Enterprise Capacity v4 and the WD Red Pro at a much lower price point. There is only a slight premium over the WD Red and the Seagate NAS HDD, but the performance for simultaneous multi-client use-cases with non-sequential workloads is much better.
Not really.... just MTBF and unrecoverable errors rate. The one that is collecting data since its foundation is, as stated multiple times along the comments, backblaze. They are collecting a lot of data and reporting those to the community in a periodic basis. They have surveyed several branched, and they have a pool of more than 30k disks and growing. Even if they are a very respectable firm, their strategy to offer unlimited backup for a very low feed lead them to look for a design that while being robust is very cheap... hence the NAS disks "consumer" grade. I find fascinating what they have achieved in no time! You might want to check at their blog, with plenty of nice information. Cheers!
Anyone happen to know when the 5TB and 6TB versions are due to hit UK? They're listed on the HGST website but when I look for them for sale I only find them available on US retailers
The biggest issue with RAID are the unrecoverable read errors. If you loose the drive, the RAID has to read 100% of the remaining drives even if there is no data on portions of the drive. If you get an error on rebuild, the entire array will die.
A UER on SATA of 1 in 10^14 bits read means a read failure every 12.5 terabytes. A 500 GB drive has 0.04E14 bits, so in the worst case rebuilding that drive in a five-drive RAID-5 group means transferring 0.20E14 bits. This means there is a 20% probability of an unrecoverable error during the rebuild. Enterprise class disks are less prone to this problem:
I've done receiver testing on sata drives before and I can tell you while drives are only tested to 10^-14 BER with 95% confidence that if the channel is clean and both the host and hard drive have good phys and you don't do something like put your phone on the hard drive then you won't see a single phy related error until something fails. A URE refers to a drive failure to read a bit. It's unrelated to sata as you implied.
Is it really worth it to get these NAS drives vs their regular versions? My use case is a home NAS, Linux software RAID or ZFS (no HBA). Will I miss anything by not using the NAS version of the drive? The difference in price is not trivial in Spain (some 20% more for the NAS model).
Comcast won't send you your neglected password https://xfinitylogin.us/ On top of the homepage, you must see the Sign in link, Click it to get redirected.
I bumped into your web site checking spec. on Hitachi 4TB, and saw your comparison chart , extremely useful, do you have any such comparison table for Seagate, or by Model No. across any given brand, and manufacturer ?? , Thanks
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
josue16 - Monday, November 24, 2014 - link
So, which of the 4 TB drives are more reliable? Are there companies that report HDD reliability?jota83 - Monday, November 24, 2014 - link
Not really.... just MTBF and unrecoverable errors rate. The one that is collecting data since its foundation is, as stated multiple times along the comments, backblaze. They are collecting a lot of data and reporting those to the community in a periodic basis. They have surveyed several branched, and they have a pool of more than 30k disks and growing. Even if they are a very respectable firm, their strategy to offer unlimited backup for a very low feed lead them to look for a design that while being robust is very cheap... hence the NAS disks "consumer" grade. I find fascinating what they have achieved in no time! You might want to check at their blog, with plenty of nice information. Cheers!Jeff Biscuits - Tuesday, December 9, 2014 - link
Anyone happen to know when the 5TB and 6TB versions are due to hit UK? They're listed on the HGST website but when I look for them for sale I only find them available on US retailersalecweder - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
The biggest issue with RAID are the unrecoverable read errors.If you loose the drive, the RAID has to read 100% of the remaining drives even if there is no data on portions of the drive. If you get an error on rebuild, the entire array will die.
http://www.enterprisestorageforum.com/storage-mana...
A UER on SATA of 1 in 10^14 bits read means a read failure every 12.5 terabytes. A 500
GB drive has 0.04E14 bits, so in the worst case rebuilding that drive in a five-drive
RAID-5 group means transferring 0.20E14 bits. This means there is a 20% probability
of an unrecoverable error during the rebuild. Enterprise class disks are less prone to this problem:
http://www.lucidti.com/zfs-checksums-add-reliabili...
hansmuff - Thursday, March 5, 2015 - link
You can circumvent these issues by using ZFS. Put that on a box with ECC RAM and back it up online, and you've got a pretty reliable solution.willis936 - Saturday, May 9, 2015 - link
I've done receiver testing on sata drives before and I can tell you while drives are only tested to 10^-14 BER with 95% confidence that if the channel is clean and both the host and hard drive have good phys and you don't do something like put your phone on the hard drive then you won't see a single phy related error until something fails. A URE refers to a drive failure to read a bit. It's unrelated to sata as you implied.comomolo - Tuesday, May 17, 2016 - link
Is it really worth it to get these NAS drives vs their regular versions? My use case is a home NAS, Linux software RAID or ZFS (no HBA). Will I miss anything by not using the NAS version of the drive? The difference in price is not trivial in Spain (some 20% more for the NAS model).Thanks for any help.
Hisated936 - Saturday, June 9, 2018 - link
Comcast won't send you your neglected password https://xfinitylogin.us/ On top of the homepage, you must see the Sign in link, Click it to get redirected.ffarzan - Tuesday, June 29, 2021 - link
I bumped into your web site checking spec. on Hitachi 4TB, and saw your comparison chart , extremely useful,do you have any such comparison table for Seagate, or by Model No. across any given brand, and manufacturer ?? , Thanks