What 1TB desktop drives should I use for my RAID5?

[JohnVM]

Have an Areca 1280-ML. Already have 6x500GB Samsung HD501LJ drives in a RAID5.

Looking to set up a second RAID array with like 8-10 1 TB drives. Looking to use desktop drives for cost (I'm aware they're more prone to fail/perform less well than the enterprise class drives, but I'm cost sensitive for this particular rig). What should I get?

Was interested in the HD103UJ's until I started reading about the issues with Areca controllers/dropping out of RAID's. It's unclear if they have this issue with the 1280ML's or only the 1680IX's, but don't want to fuck up such a large order. Looks like the 1.5TB Seagate's have same issues too/suck balls/hang and freeze up? WD1001FALS looks like an option, and the Seagate ST31000340AS's too. Both are $110/1TB drive on NewEgg at the moment.

Any particular recommendations?

-jm

 

[Rubycon]

Hitachi all the way.

You want the drive members to stay in the array!
How much cache? 2048MB is under 50 bucks and will make it fly compared to 256MB stock.

 

[JohnVM]

256, should get that 2048. Where is it only 50$?

You think the Hitachi's are better than the 1TB Seagates? The term "Deathstar" has scared me away in the past. What's the benefit vs other brand(s)?

 

[Rubycon]

Deathstar issue has been fixed many moons ago. Avoid WD. Seagate probably OK. Most of the guys using SATA on Areca hosts over at 2cpu.com will tell you that HGST seems to work the best.

This ram works because I am using one in a 1680ix-24 thrashing for six months straight now. It's even cheaper although OOS at the egg but you can froogle the Crucial part number.

 

[taltamir]

at this size you are already looking at space/$. now just pure $/drive. And AFAIK the 1.5TB drives from seagate are actually cheapest per GB last I checked... so building an array with less drives for the same target space using 1.5TB drives would be better.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16822148337

10 drives @ 1TB each @ raid5 = 9TB total.
how many drives @ 1.5TB each @ raid5 = 9TB total ?
The answer is 7 drives.
7 x 130$ = 910$

however the absolute CHEAPEST 1TB drive is 105$. 10 x 105 = 1050$.
You save money by getting 1.5TB drives.
You also can possibly get a cheaper controller, pay less for electricity, require less cooling, have less failures, reduce risk of dataloss at failure, reduce wight, possibly reduce cost of PSU, and increase speed by reducing the amount of data to calculate.

You also reduce the risk of data loss (raid 5 is NOT recommended with more then 5 drives. RAID6 is recommended for 4-9 drives, NO MORE!)

And due to random error rates, massive amounts of data it is statistically improbably for a raid arrays in the 10TB size to NOT have some minor data loss (due to random errors). I strongly recommend ZFS for that very reason since it NEVER has data loss / error. Solving all the issues with raid. http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/

You should read this at the very LEAST: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_5#RAID_5

EDIT: I see now that you were aware of the seagates, just the problem with them dropping out on your particular controller... well, dump the controller and get solaris... open solaris (osol) to be exact, from genunix.org
And use its raidz2 arrays for storage. its cheaper then buying controllers, and it is much safer.
You could also have one pool (like a partition) with two seperate raid5 arrays (so that each array does not contain too many drives)

 

[JohnVM]

Looks like there's a patch out for the 1.5TB Seagates.

Details at:
http://forums.seagate.com/stx/...date_ascending&page=21

Anyone tried them with a 1280-ML? Would obviously prefer the cheaper cost/gb and the ability to fit more space for same enclosure of 1.5TB's if they worked reliably.

rubycon: I didn't know you could use random ram like that in the controller. does any ecc unbufferred ddr2 667 ram work?

taltamir: I haven't ever particularly used solaris, and am not really dying to change OS's just for this. JFS/XFS have any of the same ability to fight data loss/error? Or only ZFS? I have heard tons of positive things bout ZFS, so I'm sure it's extremely good, just unfortunate its bound to sun. I already have the 1280-ML so switching controllers would cost more money at this point. And the issue with the 1.5TB drives was not with just the areca, it was with everything afaik, although see link above for suppossed patch.

RAID 6 is definitely a possibility, my controller supports it.

 

[Rubycon]

You *probably* can use any UNBUFFERED ECC DDR-2 module. Some report the controller is picky and REQUIRES a certain stick. Those are probably happy to sell that recommended stick at an inflated price. I know the Crucial works perhaps others may work too but the Crucial does indeed work. (I've used it in 1231ML, 1261ML, 1281ML as well as the 1680 family including the most current 1680ix series - all worked perfectly.

I would not recommend the 1.5T Seagates at this time. There is nothing wrong with putting 24 drives in RAID0,5,6,50 etc on this controller. It will max out at about 1.1GB/S but you will have copious amounts of fault tolerant storage. Rebuild rates vary tremendously with drive manufacturer as well as firmware. Remember that SATA drives are indeed a desktop product as such and their firmwares may not be optimal for this arrangement. HGST seems to work best according to those actually using them.

 

[JohnVM]

I just ordered that ram module you recco'd off of amazon (from crucial) for 28.79$. Great idea + much cheaper than I thought it could be. Plus I had like 5$ that I got from mturk.com so it really only cost me 23$. Really great info on that -- much appreciated.

What drives do you use in your rigs with all those Arecas you mentioned? HGST as that's what you've recco'd so far?

Also are you saying no to the Seagate 1.5TB due to the probability of a 2nd drive failing while first is rebuilding as it's 1.5TB vs 1TB, or due to the firmware being iffy/requiring the patch, or just the general newness of it? Perhaps all of those are valid reasons, perhaps even moreso in combination, so definitely questions there regarding the drive I suppose. Just so tempting when I think of the possibility of 30TB in this case (I have 20 bays) and low cost/gb.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Deathstar issue has been fixed many moons ago. Avoid WD. Seagate probably OK. Most of the guys using SATA on Areca hosts over at 2cpu.com will tell you that HGST seems to work the best.

From what I've seen the WDs have been more reliable as of late than Seagates. The WD1001FALS is the 3 platter version of the 640GB WD6400AAKS... which has a great reputation. The Hitachis are fine too. My current recommendation would be to avoid Seagate and go with WD or Hitachi... I'd go with the WDs myself.

 

[pugh]

My Wd's have been solid on my Areca card for many months. I would not mess with any other drive but WD for my RAID.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: JohnVM
taltamir: I haven't ever particularly used solaris, and am not really dying to change OS's just for this. JFS/XFS have any of the same ability to fight data loss/error? Or only ZFS? I have heard tons of positive things bout ZFS, so I'm sure it's extremely good, just unfortunate its bound to sun. I already have the 1280-ML so switching controllers would cost more money at this point. And the issue with the 1.5TB drives was not with just the areca, it was with everything afaik, although see link above for suppossed patch.

I wont lie to you, solaris can be a pain. But it is getting a lot better (especially the opensolaris distro)

The only file systems not currently in early alpha that can fight corruption are ZFS, and google file system, but since google isn't sharing that one (it is its biggest advantage over all its competitors, and a trade secret) then you are stuck with using ZFS or just leaving your data at risk.

download the slide labeled "ZFS: The Last Word in File System" from here:
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/docs/

And read about it in wikipedia. Those are the two best starting points of familiarization i think.
You need to decide weather the benefits are worth the effort to you.

 

[taltamir]

delete

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: pugh
My Wd's have been solid on my Areca card for many months. I would not mess with any other drive but WD for my RAID.

I never had a problem with 10 raptors on a 1680 myself but Jus on 2cpu.com will tell you about WDC. Now there definitely IS a problem with WD640's and the 1680ix family that REQUIRES you to run the beta firmware (1.46 is not out yet to fix it) or you WILL get drives dropping as soon as you start large transfers.