8TB WD RED £271.35 @ Amazon
-13°Expired

8TB WD RED £271.35 @ Amazon

£271.35Amazon Deals
18
Found 6th Jan
This 8TB WD red appears to be rather good value for those in the market for one! It's coming in about £50 cheaper than rivals, and Amazon returns are dead easy should that be required.

Ideal for NAS owners :-)

18 Comments

This isnt actually a bad price at all. Could do with a new drive in my NAS....

Have some heat OP

Like the Star Wars guy said. hot

4 of these in raid5 should look after even the most enthusiastic 'special interest' movie collector for some time.

Hot - and I got an offer of £259.74 from Flubit which I am very tempted by.
Edited by: "xavk" 6th Jan

Original Poster

-7 for the cheapest price on the web and cheapest ever price for these from Amazon... Makes me wonder why I bother sometimes.

If you don't know what these are don't vote.

*Sighs*

@commentors thanks folks, good to see some people aren't idiots!

@xavk, that's a cracking price. I'd be tempted myself if I didn't already have so many WD reds!

Original Poster

mchcreations

I voted hot, but if you need 2 or any amount of pairs is still cheaper to … I voted hot, but if you need 2 or any amount of pairs is still cheaper to buy the My Book of 16TB, usually for around £470-£480. You get both cheaper and a free raid case.https://www.wdc.com/en-gb/products/external-storage/my-book-duo.html#WDBLWE0160JCH-EESNhttps://www.amazon.co.uk/16TB-Desktop-External-Drive-WDBLWE0160JCH-EESN/dp/B01D39E2DU


True, hence the wd student shop offers I posted last year, at which point you could get 2 of these drives for £400. The only downside to buying in the my book range is the guarantee isn't as good. This is still the best price for those who don't want two though.


Edited by: "Scorpion" 6th Jan

Banned

andrewborland182

4 of these in raid5 should look after even the most enthusiastic 'special … 4 of these in raid5 should look after even the most enthusiastic 'special interest' movie collector for some time.



Nonono please do NOT do this. Google RAID 5 write hole. Essentially disks now are too big for RAID5 you will at some point need to rebuild it and when you do you will hit an unrecoverable read error and loose everything on the array.

Use RAID 6 or double parity RAID 5 but please raid 5 is so 1990 its no good any more. Trust me I've lost a r5 array not fun... And yes you should have a backup , raid is not a backup method

HOT. Great price. In need of some new disks.

And about the above post for write hole. Write hole can exist on ANY level of RAID including R6 / R10 etc.
It occurs during a power failure or disk controller failure when data fails to be written correctly. Major vendors overcome the issue by using a battery backup unit and very good servers have multiple disk controllers too. You can solve the power failure write issue by having a UPS.

I do agree however that RAID 5 is crap. It is no good for disks bigger than 1TB. It's old tech and it's not suited to modern disk sizes. I've also had a URE while rebuilding a customers RAID5 array. Don't use R5. Also agree you should use R6 or R10 but since most of us will be using it for storing crap and not mission critical stuff then you probably want R6 otherwise R10 will take 50% of your disk capacity.

And I also second having a proper backup strategy. Loosing 8TB is not fun. Nor is loosing all your photos etc.

Edited by: "daskapital" 7th Jan

daskapital

HOT. Great price. In need of some new disks. And about the above post for … HOT. Great price. In need of some new disks. And about the above post for write hole. Write hole can exist on ANY level of RAID including R6 / R10 etc. It occurs during a power failure or disk controller failure when data fails to be written correctly. Major vendors overcome the issue by using a battery backup unit and very good servers have multiple disk controllers too. You can solve the power failure write issue by having a UPS. I do agree however that RAID 5 is crap. It is no good for disks bigger than 1TB. It's old tech and it's not suited to modern disk sizes. I've also had a URE while rebuilding a customers RAID5 array. Don't use R5. Also agree you should use R6 or R10 but since most of us will be using it for storing crap and not mission critical stuff then you probably want R6 otherwise R10 will take 50% of your disk capacity. And I also second having a proper backup strategy. Loosing 8TB is not fun. Nor is loosing all your photos etc.



I dont know if you can help but you seem to know your stuff so hopefully you can.

I've got a bunch of different drives totalling to 30TB.
Heres a breakdown:
5TB RED x2, 6TB RED, 6TB RED Pro, 8TB Archive Drive.

They're holding all my media for streaming via Plex so nothing irreplaceable.
I've currently got them as is. No raid, no backup solution. It's not the end of the world if one drive was to die but it would take a few days to redownload everything lost.

I've read up a little on parity but I think it needs identical disks. Would you suggest I go down this route and replace the current disks and buy matching ones to have some form of redundancy?

I don't need to have a mirror copy of everything as it's replaceable and the expense would be huge and disproportionate to the benefits.

Cheers.

Check out Drive Pool (https://stablebit.com/DrivePool). Presents a bunch of disks as one large one and allows you duplicate by folder (so you can ensure Photos will survive any HD failure but Pron will not for example).

Original Poster

Price drop by a whole pound. That'll stop the cold voters!

Killer Hornet:

You don't need identical disks for partity BUT it will use the lowest amount. If you had say 4 x 2TB disks and 1 x 1TB disk and you RAID them together, then your entire array would look like it had 5 x 1TB disks. To be honest, I think you might already have a good approach with just having separate disks. RAID does not provide any backup, it merely provides fault tolerance for the loss of 1 or more disks.

RAID 5 can only suffer the loss of 1 disk. RAID6 allows for the loss of 2 disks, which to be honest would be pretty unlikely that any others would fail if you were to rebuild the array straight away.

The question is: do you need increased read/write speed ? Do you need fault tollerance for the loss of any 1/2 disks?
If you don't then there is no need for RAID or to replace your disks. Just keep good backups. I would think your best thing to do would be to invest in some external disks for backups, but 30TB wow that's a lot of stuff I have about 5TB and thats my everything, photos, music, movies, TV etc.

So in your situation, I would think having a backup might be a good idea. If you were to mirror your 2x 5TB then that would turn 10TB into 5TB and you would still only be able to loose one disk.

Edited by: "daskapital" 8th Jan

daskapital

Killer Hornet:You don't need identical disks for partity BUT it will use … Killer Hornet:You don't need identical disks for partity BUT it will use the lowest amount. If you had say 4 x 2TB disks and 1 x 1TB disk and you RAID them together, then your entire array would look like it had 5 x 1TB disks. To be honest, I think you might already have a good approach with just having separate disks. RAID does not provide any backup, it merely provides fault tolerance for the loss of 1 or more disks. RAID 5 can only suffer the loss of 1 disk. RAID6 allows for the loss of 2 disks, which to be honest would be pretty unlikely that any others would fail if you were to rebuild the array straight away. The question is: do you need increased read/write speed ? Do you need fault tollerance for the loss of any 1/2 disks? If you don't then there is no need for RAID or to replace your disks. Just keep good backups. I would think your best thing to do would be to invest in some external disks for backups, but 30TB wow that's a lot of stuff I have about 5TB and thats my everything, photos, music, movies, TV etc.So in your situation, I would think having a backup might be a good idea. If you were to mirror your 2x 5TB then that would turn 10TB into 5TB and you would still only be able to loose one disk.



Thanks for the information.

Fault tolerance would be nice to have.

My best route would likely be to keep my 6TB drives and replace the rest. Although I'd need to change motherboard or platform too as ITX only has 4 ports and adding a raid card my be more expensive/troublesome than its worth.

I think for the time being I'll leave it as it is. Perhaps over time I'll move towards converting to a RAID 6 array.

K1LLER HORNET

Thanks for the information. Fault tolerance would be nice to have.My best … Thanks for the information. Fault tolerance would be nice to have.My best route would likely be to keep my 6TB drives and replace the rest. Although I'd need to change motherboard or platform too as ITX only has 4 ports and adding a raid card my be more expensive/troublesome than its worth. I think for the time being I'll leave it as it is. Perhaps over time I'll move towards converting to a RAID 6 array.




Think you have a pretty solid plan there. I would keep the 6 TBs and maybe make a RAID 6 of new smaller disks.
I also don't know your computer setup, but I have a linux box that runs Ubuntu on it, and I have some really cheap SATA cards that cost me £25 (it's gone up a little since then) I then use software RAID6 on some old SSDs that I er, borrowed from work (they were throwing them out to be fair) and I have RAID0 on two 3TB disks

So I have 1 TB of RAID6 on SSDs (which is lighning fast, and SSD so kinda more reliable)
and I have 6TB in RAID0 spining disks.

Then I backup both the RAID6 and RAID0 disks to 2 external hard disks.
I keep one external hard disk at my mums house (can you tell I work in IT ?) in case of disaster at my house.

I then sync both external hard disks about once per month only syncing the changes (linux does this really well with rsync)

Regarding adding RAID cards, you might not need to. Software RAID works pretty well under windows or linux and you can get really cheap SATA cards. Have a look on Amazon for "Syba SATA III 4 Port PCI-e" it works perfectly under linux and windows out of the box, no drivers needed, gives you 4 extra sata ports and doesn't need any additional power connector.

daskapital

Think you have a pretty solid plan there. I would keep the 6 TBs and … Think you have a pretty solid plan there. I would keep the 6 TBs and maybe make a RAID 6 of new smaller disks. I also don't know your computer setup, but I have a linux box that runs Ubuntu on it, and I have some really cheap SATA cards that cost me £25 (it's gone up a little since then) I then use software RAID6 on some old SSDs that I er, borrowed from work (they were throwing them out to be fair) and I have RAID0 on two 3TB disks So I have 1 TB of RAID6 on SSDs (which is lighning fast, and SSD so kinda more reliable)and I have 6TB in RAID0 spining disks. Then I backup both the RAID6 and RAID0 disks to 2 external hard disks. I keep one external hard disk at my mums house (can you tell I work in IT ?) in case of disaster at my house. I then sync both external hard disks about once per month only syncing the changes (linux does this really well with rsync)Regarding adding RAID cards, you might not need to. Software RAID works pretty well under windows or linux and you can get really cheap SATA cards. Have a look on Amazon for "Syba SATA III 4 Port PCI-e" it works perfectly under linux and windows out of the box, no drivers needed, gives you 4 extra sata ports and doesn't need any additional power connector.



Plan for the worst, hope for the best

I've got a Haswell based ITX system housing the 5 mentioned hard drives along with a basic boot SSD running Windows 10 with Plex for streaming which is the systems sole purpose.

I will certainly look at that add in card as the one I have at the moment is from my xbox flashing days. It's a basic via card with only 2 sata ports. 4 would allow me some room to grow and max out the available hard drive bays.

I've got Windows handling raid 0 with a few ssd's on my main rig so have experience with that. Would you recommend letting Windows handle raid 6 or use a 3rd party application?

Original Poster

Back up to £300.59 now. So expiring.

K1ller hornet, take a look at unraid. It needs a 'parity' drive equal or greater in size than your largest data drive but other than that it copes with mixed sized drives very well. It's not a high performance solution as every write operation needs to recalc the parity but I've been using it for a few years and found it rock solid. And in-place drive replacements, i.e. Swapping out a drive for a larger disk, works a treat.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text