Western Digital's Red 2 - 6TB NAS drives apparently aren't good for NAS use?

[Curufinwe_wins]

15 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Well then you are one of the fortunate ones who gets a small fortune on your paycheck..... For us mere mortals the only option for mass storage is HDD.

In fairness, it all depends on the size of your backup these days. HDDs basically are stuck at a minimum of 40-60 dollars regardless of size, and you can buy a 1TB ssd these days for under 100 dollars. Even 2TB of SSD storage is down to like 170-210 dollars which would around 3-5x the cost of a decent HDD of the same size.

 

Obviously that isn't nothing... but it's not that unreasonable either. Now if you like me are running 10+ TB of backed-up data... SSDs for all that is definitely a huge cost. His 31 4TB SSDs... that sounds insane.

[jagdtigger]

33 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Obviously that isn't nothing...

More like its huge when your monthly wage is ~850 USD....

[Kilrah]

17 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

How can i check if a HDD is using this "hidden feature"....

Typically an SMR drive will write at about half the speed it reads at, while a normal one should be very similar for both

[JSaville]

22 minutes ago, Escanor said:

I understood its only the 2 tb drives and the 6 tb drives, that the 4 tb reds are fine, if been running my nas for network boot related things and media etc in raid 0 haven't had issues, heck i have old nas with 2x 500 wd drives that have nearly 10 years on time and not a single error and still passes extended test just fine.

It's red efax variant drives from 2 - 6TB, so 3 & 4TB are included in this issue. If you have the older efrx series then you're fine. I'm running 2 x 6TB efrx currently and they've been faultless.

[JSaville]

10 minutes ago, Escanor said:

 

So my WD40EFRX from last year also have it ?

That drive is fine, it's only the newer efax that has SMR. 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

7 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Well then you are one of the fortunate ones who gets a small fortune on your paycheck..... For us mere mortals the only option for mass storage is HDD.

Paycheck? What paycheck? I'm retired on a pension and Social Security. I never got a small fortune on my paychecks while i was still working.

 

I paid for most of my SSDs from savings that had been earmarked for a new pickup truck. Now, I'm going to have to drive my old one for quite a few more years.

[StDragon]

Holy shit! That explains soooo much with a 6TB WD Red Pro dropping out of RAID. Spent countless hours years ago on the phone with a Synology engineer. RMA's of equipment, finger pointing, etc. In the end all got replaced with Seagate IronWolf drives as each Red dropped out one by one over the span of a year. And the real kicker, diags confirmed that not a single Red drive had any errors. All perfectly healthy.

 

Wow, total closure to that saga. And yet, I'm extremely pissed off at WD now!!!

[S w a t s o n]

Imagine using spinning rust in current year

[Lady Fitzgerald]

2 hours ago, S w a t s o n said:

Imagine using spinning rust in current year

It depends on your budget and/or how much data storage space you need,

[Kilrah]

4 hours ago, StDragon said:

Spent countless hours years ago

Seems you missed the fact that this was with recent drives, like within the last year. SMR drives didn't even exist "years ago".

[StDragon]

44 minutes ago, Kilrah said:

Seems you missed the fact that this was with recent drives, like within the last year. SMR drives didn't even exist "years ago".

https://www.anandtech.com/show/7290/seagate-to-ship-5tb-hdd-in-2014-using-shingled-magnetic-recording/

 

That was back in 2014. Now that said, I'm not sure if and when exactly the 6TB WD Red Pro's started using SMR. This still an evolving story last I've read. But but I'm like 99% convinced this was what the issue was. That or it's one helluva coincidence!

 

"Years ago" is more like 18 months ago or some such in my specific case. So was WD using SMR at that time? Who knows, but the tech has been around for a lot longer for other vendors. So relatively speaking, SMR isn't some exotic brand new technology; 2014 is old by tech standards.

[jagdtigger]

18 hours ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

Paycheck? What paycheck? I'm retired on a pension and Social Security. I never got a small fortune on my paychecks while i was still working.

 

I paid for most of my SSDs from savings that had been earmarked for a new pickup truck. Now, I'm going to have to drive my old one for quite a few more years.

Well i wouldnt waste my savings on things that wont matter. For an OS, sure. I throw in a middle category ssd, but for data storage? Its a total and utter waste of the money.

[Master Disaster]

On 4/17/2020 at 7:57 AM, GDRRiley said:

I swear WD, Toshiba and Seagate this is some let’s get a nice class actions suit. WD for new reds, Toshiba on their p300 and Seagate on whatever desktop models have it. 
If this doesn’t count as false advertising and failure to discloses what the product is, time to rewrite those laws. 

Its a cut and dry case, all the companies sell SMR drives labelled as SMR drives so there's no reason why these other drives cannot be labelled correctly either, its at minimum misleading advertising.

 

I believe that false advertising means they're making a claim that's untrue while misleading advertising is leaving information out of an advert that's important to the customer.

 

Now if they can prove the three of them colluded then its a much bigger deal but I honestly don't think that's the case. Its more likely that one of them did it first, the others noticed and its a "well if they're already doing it then why shouldn't we" type of situation.

[Master Disaster]

6 hours ago, StDragon said:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/7290/seagate-to-ship-5tb-hdd-in-2014-using-shingled-magnetic-recording/

 

That was back in 2014. Now that said, I'm not sure if and when exactly the 6TB WD Red Pro's started using SMR. This still an evolving story last I've read. But but I'm like 99% convinced this was what the issue was. That or it's one helluva coincidence!

 

"Years ago" is more like 18 months ago or some such in my specific case. So was WD using SMR at that time? Who knows, but the tech has been around for a lot longer for other vendors. So relatively speaking, SMR isn't some exotic brand new technology; 2014 is old by tech standards.

Its been around for ages but it was always used as a WORM drive (Write Once Read Many) for mass storage in data centres and educational/scientific institutions, that's what it was invented to do. One of the articles linked in this thread says as much.

 

EDIT - Yeah, on Wikipedia it says it was invented in 2010 and the first drives hit the market in 2013 so either 7 or 10 years depending on how to look at it.

[jagdtigger]

39 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

I believe that false advertising means they're making a claim that's untrue while misleading advertising is leaving information out of an advert that's important to the customer.

Well WD does claim that the new drives are performing better than what they replace....

[Lady Fitzgerald]

8 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Well i wouldnt waste my savings on things that wont matter. For an OS, sure. I throw in a middle category ssd, but for data storage? Its a total and utter waste of the money.

People making assumptions about other people just makes me tired all over. For you, maybe it is a waste of money.

 

For me, however, the advantages were well worth the price. At the time I bought the bulk of them, the largest good HDDs were only 4-6TB and I anticipated I would eventually need up to 20TB. Back then, I had three 4TB data drives in the computer. Each of my data drives has a set of four backup drives: two of each set kept onsite and the other two of each set kept offsite in my safe deposit box at my credit union. Since I swapped out my onsite and offisite backup drives at least once a month, that meant lugging six HDDs to and from my credit union at least once a month.

 

I'm a handicapped senior citizen. Lugging just six drives around was killing my back and shoulders (often sending me to bed); ten would have been murder. Also, just the six drives I had onsite at the time was eating up a lot of storage space and I wasn't going to have room for ten of them. Those six and the antistatic foam egg crate I kept them in filled up a large drawer. I was also out of room in my safe deposit box and a larger one was not available. A second safe deposit box also wasn't an option because one also wasn't  available and cost quite a bit more. Also, since there wasn't room for a foam egg crate in my safe deposit box, I had to put all my backup drives into antistatic bags before lugging them to my credit union, then remove them from the bags when after lugging the replacement back home, a real hassle.

 

SSDs are smaller, lighter, and more durable. I only had room for six HDDs in my safe deposit. Now, I have room for 22 SSDs (not that I will ever have even close to that). I lugged the six drives in a large, heavy Pelican case that had a built in foam egg crate (not antistatic) to protect HDDs while in transit. I had to put the drives in the antistatic bags, then in the case, take them out at my credit union, put the drives going home into the case, take them out of the antibags at home, then put them back in the egg crate in the drawer.

 

Now, I have a pair of identical antistatic foam egg crates I made, one of which will fit into a much smaller (and lighter!) Pelican case and and in a much smaller drawer (with space to spare in that drawer). The other easily fits inside my safe deposit box, taking up less space the the six HDDs did. Each egg crate can hold up to 22 SSDs (the number of drives determined by the size egg crate needed to fit in the Pelican case. When I need to swap out my onsite and offsite backup drives, I just pull the egg crate out of the drawer and slip it into the Pelican case; no antistatic bags needed. At my credit union, I just swap out egg crates. Easy peasy, quick and easy, and my back and shoulders no longer give me grief even though I'm up to ten backup drives. Also, I don't have to handle the SSDs like eggs like I did the HDD s.

 

Being far faster, updating the formerly offsite backup drives doesn't take seemingly forever. The data drives draw less power and take up far less room in the computer. I definitely do NOT consider them a waste of money!

[S w a t s o n]

16 minutes ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

People making assumptions about other people just makes me tired all over. For you, maybe it is a waste of money.

 

For me, however, the advantages were well worth the price. At the time I bought the bulk of them, the largest good HDDs were only 4-6TB and I anticipated I would eventually need up to 20TB. Back then, I had three 4TB data drives in the computer. Each of my data drives has a set of four backup drives: two of each set kept onsite and the other two of each set kept offsite in my safe deposit box at my credit union.

What the fuck? Did you work for the NSA or something. What are you backing up in such large amounts that needs to be kept THAT secure, jesus christ. I dont even keep an onsite backup

[Lady Fitzgerald]

1 minute ago, S w a t s o n said:

What the fuck? Did you work for the NSA or something. What are you backing up in such large amounts that needs to be kept THAT secure, jesus christ. I dont even keep an onsite backup

And what's your problem? Why on earth is this such an issue for you? Why is it so inconceivable to you that people other than you have needs that are different than yours? Good grief, the world doesn't revolve around you!

 

I run a paperless home "office". All my personal records are digitized and the only paper I keep is what is required by law (birth certificate, etc.). I also have a lifetime (a long lifetime) of photos, a large collection of ebooks, a large collection of ripped music, and an even larger colletion of movies (and, before you can say it, no, not porn). I used to professionally write, arrange, and digitally engrave music so that eats iup some space. Much of my data is irreplaceable and much of the rest would be difficult and/or expensive to replace. Having extensive backups has saved my an immeasurable amount of grief. 

 

You may not value your data enough to be bothered with even onsite backups but that doesn't mean others do not. Build a bridge and get over it (and yourself)!

[jagdtigger]

1 hour ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

People making assumptions about other people just makes me tired all over. For you, maybe it is a waste of money.

Now that you explained it a huge waste of time too. Get backup storage from a company(backblaze, etc) then sync your files to there encrypted. That will keep your  files safe from prying eyes and you could save a lot of money and time.

 

And im not generalizing just always look at the gains vs cost and try to find a compromise. Even i have backups in the cloud if the data warrants it but it is heavily encrypted before it leaves the local system.

 

/EDIT

And just as an FIY i have 3 NAS on site constantly syncing the important data.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

1 minute ago, jagdtigger said:

Now that you explained it a huge waste of time too. Get backup storage from a company(backblaze, etc) then sync your files to there encrypted. That will keep your  files safe from prying eyes and you could save a lot of money and time.

 

And im not generalizing just always look at the gains vs cost and try to find a compromise. Even i have backups in the cloud if the data warrants it but it is heavily encrypted before it leaves the local system.

 Sigh, you still don't get it!  I explained my gains vs costs and you are still judging by your standards. It's like you weren't paying attention. Also, in this latest post of yours, you have demonstrated you don't know jack about backups and, considering how closed your mind is, I'm not going nto waste my time trying to explain it to you. Good luck, you'll need it.

[jagdtigger]

10 minutes ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

 Sigh, you still don't get it!  I explained my gains vs costs and you are still judging by your standards. It's like you weren't paying attention. Also, in this latest post of yours, you have demonstrated you don't know jack about backups and, considering how closed your mind is, I'm not going nto waste my time trying to explain it to you. Good luck, you'll need it.

Oh really, and in what way your methodology is better than an offsite cloud backup that is encrypted and can synced more than one time at a day? What difference it makes if you pay annually for a box(plus the commute) or the cloud storage? Sorry if it hurts you feelings but lets face it, you have a highly inefficient system there. (regardless of whom standards are used)

[Kilrah]

Cloud backup is ridiculous for large amounts of data for most people, not everybody has Linus' internet connection. 

I modified 40GB of data today, this would take 6 hours maxing out my upload to the point I can't do anything comfortably just to sync. Updating my local HDD backup it's 2 minutes.

 

I'd also consider all flash total overkill though, but if it has physical advantages for them and they're willing to spend the money it's their choice. 

[TomvanWijnen]

On 4/17/2020 at 11:38 AM, JSaville said:

That drive is fine, it's only the newer efax that has SMR. 

I have a WD Red WD20EFRX-68EUZN0 2TB from a couple of years old, do you think that that one is fine?

 

18 hours ago, S w a t s o n said:

Imagine using spinning rust in current year

Imagine being rich enough for all SSD storage

[S w a t s o n]

2 hours ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

And what's your problem? Why on earth is this such an issue for you? Why is it so inconceivable to you that people other than you have needs that are different than yours? Good grief, the world doesn't revolve around you!

 

I run a paperless home "office". All my personal records are digitized and the only paper I keep is what is required by law (birth certificate, etc.). I also have a lifetime (a long lifetime) of photos, a large collection of ebooks, a large collection of ripped music, and an even larger colletion of movies (and, before you can say it, no, not porn). I used to professionally write, arrange, and digitally engrave music so that eats iup some space. Much of my data is irreplaceable and much of the rest would be difficult and/or expensive to replace. Having extensive backups has saved my an immeasurable amount of grief. 

 

You may not value your data enough to be bothered with even onsite backups but that doesn't mean others do not. Build a bridge and get over it (and yourself)!

That's a long way of saying you're a data hoarder

[Unixsystem]

2 minutes ago, S w a t s o n said:

That's a long way of saying you're a data hoarder

And why is it wrong or any of your business what other people of with their data? There's a market for slow, cheap mass storage and companies have been filling it. The only issue with that arrangement is when the companies lie about the products that they are selling. 

 

Whether or not SSDs are superior to HDDs isn't even tangentially related to the topic.