Seagate BarraCuda 4TB 3.5" Hard Drive, £94.96 from Ebuyer
96°Expired

Seagate BarraCuda 4TB 3.5" Hard Drive, £94.96 from Ebuyer

14
Found 17th Nov
  • Tireless Durability
  • Amazing Versatility
  • Multi-Tier Caching Technology
  • Advanced Power
  • 2 Year Warranty

14 Comments

Any good for a NAS?

007xico29 m ago

Any good for a NAS?



I wouldnt myself unless maybe its in a RAID 1+ setup or the data is ok to lose.

tech347511 m ago

I wouldnt myself unless maybe its in a RAID 1+ setup or the data is ok to …I wouldnt myself unless maybe its in a RAID 1+ setup or the data is ok to lose.


Why is that? Because the nas is not meant to be used in a NAS or because the drive is crap ?

007xico28 m ago

Why is that? Because the nas is not meant to be used in a NAS or because …Why is that? Because the nas is not meant to be used in a NAS or because the drive is crap ?



Seagate have a reputation for higher failure rate and something on 24/7 is unlikely to help

If you go Seagate I would recommend regular monitoring and maybe consider cloud backup (the latter saved the data on my failed 3TB Seagate).

backblaze.com/blo…17/
Edited by: "tech3475" 17th Nov

Tried them all....... and ALL have failed under some stress and age

cburns21 m ago

Tried them all....... and ALL have failed under some stress and age …Tried them all....... and ALL have failed under some stress and age



They all will over time, the issue is how quickly they fail in a given time period (the failure rate), especially for what they wanted to do (NAS).

Even just from a value perspective, I plan on stop purchasing Seagate HDDs where possible because any money saved seems lost in the long term.

tech34752 h, 29 m ago

I wouldnt myself unless maybe its in a RAID 1+ setup or the data is ok to …I wouldnt myself unless maybe its in a RAID 1+ setup or the data is ok to lose.


That's the same for all manufacturers unfortunately, relying on one drive to live forever is foolish. Even if you're not using these in a server/NAS (which will definitely support RAID), windows has supported software RAID under the name 'storage spaces' since Windows 7.

CampGareth22 m ago

That's the same for all manufacturers unfortunately, relying on one drive …That's the same for all manufacturers unfortunately, relying on one drive to live forever is foolish. Even if you're not using these in a server/NAS (which will definitely support RAID), windows has supported software RAID under the name 'storage spaces' since Windows 7.



See my later response in regards to failure rate.

Also be careful with storage spaces as things like error checking have given me issues, at least with parity across 3 drives on S2016.
Edited by: "tech3475" 17th Nov

tech347530 m ago

See my later response in regards to failure rate.Also be careful with …See my later response in regards to failure rate.Also be careful with storage spaces as things like error checking have given me issues, at least with parity across 3 drives on S2016.


I'm assuming the ones with a 31% and 18% failure rate per year had some sort of fault or were from bad batches, certainly it's a much smaller sample size. That leaves what, 3%? Sounds scary, but means the average drive only has a 33% chance of being dead 10 years down the line (unless my maths is dodgy, 1.03^10?). That's fiiiiine. If anything the lesson is bad batches are bad, try to spread out your drive purchases to reduce the chance of all your drives being from one.

CampGareth30 m ago

I'm assuming the ones with a 31% and 18% failure rate per year had some …I'm assuming the ones with a 31% and 18% failure rate per year had some sort of fault or were from bad batches, certainly it's a much smaller sample size. That leaves what, 3%? Sounds scary, but means the average drive only has a 33% chance of being dead 10 years down the line (unless my maths is dodgy, 1.03^10?). That's fiiiiine. If anything the lesson is bad batches are bad, try to spread out your drive purchases to reduce the chance of all your drives being from one.



That's making an assumption though that it's a bad batch, or at least that said batch is out of circulation and the flaw which caused it gone.

Regardless, for what 007xico wanted it for, there are drives which may be better suited to their needs as they were designed for NAS operations such as the WD RED line and even Segates own NAS line.

If given the choice now, I'd choose to get the better drive for my needs for a little bit more than to just go with the cheapest.

tech347540 m ago

That's making an assumption though that it's a bad batch, or at least that …That's making an assumption though that it's a bad batch, or at least that said batch is out of circulation and the flaw which caused it gone.Regardless, for what 007xico wanted it for, there are drives which may be better suited to their needs as they were designed for NAS operations such as the WD RED line and even Segates own NAS line.If given the choice now, I'd choose to get the better drive for my needs for a little bit more than to just go with the cheapest.


Well the drive models are gone, they're from 2013 and have been relabelled at the least.

I take a different approach to drives. Cheapest possible is absolutely fine so long as you assume that any drive will fail and put appropriate protections in place, and so long as the warranty lasts for as long as you intend to keep the drive. Case in point I bought a bunch of 2TB Toshibas for under £50 each back in 2015. 4 of 5 are fine, the one that died did so outside of the 2 year warranty but since it's 2017 now I wouldn't mind replacing it with a 3 or 4TB, maybe even an 8 if the deal's right.

CampGareth43 m ago

Well the drive models are gone, they're from 2013 and have been relabelled …Well the drive models are gone, they're from 2013 and have been relabelled at the least.I take a different approach to drives. Cheapest possible is absolutely fine so long as you assume that any drive will fail and put appropriate protections in place, and so long as the warranty lasts for as long as you intend to keep the drive. Case in point I bought a bunch of 2TB Toshibas for under £50 each back in 2015. 4 of 5 are fine, the one that died did so outside of the 2 year warranty but since it's 2017 now I wouldn't mind replacing it with a 3 or 4TB, maybe even an 8 if the deal's right.



If you go that route, I'd make sure to at least go for a RAID/Parity which supports at least two redundancies and/or at least one extra copy somewhere unless it's data which can be easily replaced e.g. a DVD rip, computer backup, etc.

Just remember as well that you may not be able to mix/match different sized drives depending on the setup.

tech347537 m ago

If you go that route, I'd make sure to at least go for a RAID/Parity which …If you go that route, I'd make sure to at least go for a RAID/Parity which supports at least two redundancies and/or at least one extra copy somewhere unless it's data which can be easily replaced e.g. a DVD rip, computer backup, etc.Just remember as well that you may not be able to mix/match different sized drives depending on the setup.


Mmm, good advice, though if you're using more than about 4 drives or multiple machines I'd recommend Ceph. The core of it is a command to maintain at least <2, 3, X> copies of any data and to put the copies as far away from the originals as possible so as to escape failure domains.

It's less space efficient than raid 5 or 6, but it'll do things like spread data across separate machines (which FreeNAS can't do iirc) and automatic recovery in the event of a drive failure. So long as there's enough space in the cluster to store your data plus all the copies in multiple places, it'll survive anything. Even if you lose all but one drive you can still recover whatever data was on there as it's not using fancy trickery at the block level. Plus, it's open source
Edited by: "CampGareth" 17th Nov

CampGareth4 m ago

Mmm, good advice, though if you're using more than about 4 drives I'd …Mmm, good advice, though if you're using more than about 4 drives I'd recommend Ceph. The core of it is a command to maintain at least <2, 3, X> copies of any data and to put the copies as far away from the originals as possible so as to escape failure domains. It's less space efficient than raid 5 or 6, but it'll do things like spread data across separate machines (which FreeNAS can't do iirc) and automatic recovery in the event of a drive failure. So long as there's enough space in the cluster to store your data plus all the copies in multiple places, it'll survive anything. Even if you lose all but one drive you can still recover whatever data was on there as it's not using fancy trickery at the block level. Plus, it's open source



Another alternative is to go with online backups if you have a decent enough upload speed.

Not the most secure but there are steps you can take such as a custom encryption key and at least then you have an offsite backup as well.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text