Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 23

Thread: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    27,501
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,700 times in 589 posts

    Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Cloud storage data centre company relies upon over 90,000 HDDs.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    London town
    Posts
    247
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked
    13 times in 10 posts

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    I think the short conclusion is wow, consumer drives are incredibly reliable now.

    From my own server, i've had 15 8TB seagate drives running for over three years without a single failure - that's 16,000 drive days. Maybe I should publish my own stats?

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    135
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Consumer drives have been reliable for a long time. In 20 years, and dozens of hard drives, I've only ever had 2 failures. Only one of those was a catastrophic failure.

    I've seen more failures at work in the past 12 years with my current company with so-called Enterprise-grade drives than I've ever seen in my personal and professional experience with consumer drives.

    I think the takeaway is that yes, drives are extremely reliable for easily the past 15 years, and WD still isn't sure it knows how to make a reliable hard drive! lol

  4. #4
    Cinnamon Roll
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    443
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked
    25 times in 24 posts
    • Ozaron's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI Z170 SLI Plus
      • CPU:
      • i5-6600K @ 4.3GHz
      • Memory:
      • 16GB HyperX DDR4 2666MHz CL14
      • Storage:
      • Toshiba X300 4TB (2), Samsung 850 Evo 500GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12-II 620w
      • Case:
      • In Win 707 ATX
      • Operating System:
      • W10 Enterprise 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • BenQ GW2765HT
      • Internet:
      • 150KB/s ↓ 50KB/s ↑ ~35ms

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    My last WD Blue 1TB drive failed after barely more than a year (of light use) while having a virus scan run on it. Maxed out at around 260GB stored. Welp.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    190
    Thanks
    58
    Thanked
    29 times in 19 posts
    • chinf's system
      • Motherboard:
      • 1: Asus M5A97 R2.0; 2: Asus M5A97 LE R2.0
      • CPU:
      • 1: AMD FX-8320E, Coolermaster Seidon V120 V2; 2: AMD PhenomII X3 710, Corsair H45
      • Memory:
      • 1: 16GB ECC DDR3L-1600; 2: 16GB ECC DDR3L-1600
      • Storage:
      • 1: Sandisk SSD, 4 WD, 1 Seagate, 1 HGST, 2 Toshiba HDDs; 2: Crucial SSD, 4 Samsung HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 1: HIS Radeon HD6850, Corsair H55 & NZXT G10; 2: MSI Radeon RX 480 8GB
      • PSU:
      • 1: be quiet! Straight Power 10 400W; 2: Antec EA500D
      • Case:
      • 1: Antec P182; 2: Antec Sonata
      • Operating System:
      • 1: Ubuntu 15.10 & 16.04; 2: Ubuntu 16.04 & Win10
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 24" @1920x1080, Iiyama 18" CRT

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    I have a small population of 3.5" hard drives of varying ages, including Seagates, Samsungs, HGST and WD, and the worst performers have been the Seagates by a country mile.

    Among my most recent failed drives were two Seagate ST2000DM001s which saw little use and barely lasted a year each before failing with very quick degradation, but my six ancient 160GB IDE Barracudas are still working fine though not used much anymore. I've had a 1TB WD Green slowly fail that was in constant use for several years and lasted well beyond warranty, and I've got several other WDs of varying ages and they're fine. No problems yet with my four 500GB Samsungs even though they're now pretty old.

    Not sure if Seagate will fix their reliability before spinning rust becomes extinct.

  6. #6
    Anthropomorphic Personification shaithis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Last Aerie
    Posts
    10,795
    Thanks
    633
    Thanked
    865 times in 731 posts
    • shaithis's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z77 WS
      • CPU:
      • i7 3770k @ 4.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • 32GB HyperX 1866
      • Storage:
      • Lots!
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Fury X
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850
      • Case:
      • Corsair 600T (White)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x Dell 3007
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb Fibre

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by chinf View Post
    Not sure if Seagate will fix their reliability before spinning rust becomes extinct.
    I doubt it, the STxxxxDM001 drives have been around for a number of years now and have been shoddy since day 1, can't see that changing now.
    Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
    HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
    HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
    Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
    NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
    Laptop: Lenovo Flex 2 / 12GB RAM / 240GB Corsair Force 3 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: HTC One U11 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM12.1 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive

  7. #7
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    9,111
    Thanks
    422
    Thanked
    916 times in 780 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M5A-97 EVO R2.0
      • CPU:
      • FX-8350
      • Memory:
      • 16GB ECC 1333
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 28 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by gagaga View Post
    I think the short conclusion is wow, consumer drives are incredibly reliable now.

    From my own server, i've had 15 8TB seagate drives running for over three years without a single failure - that's 16,000 drive days. Maybe I should publish my own stats?
    They are supposed to be reliable as long as they are in warranty.

    Quote Originally Posted by DaMoot View Post
    ... with so-called Enterprise-grade drives than I've ever seen in my personal and professional experience with consumer drives.
    Whose enterprise drives are those then?

    I think I have seen failures from every drive manufacturer past and present. Remember Quantum? They were really good, but I still had a consumer one where the head fell off.

  8. #8
    "Ultra low end E-PEEN" CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moosetopia
    Posts
    28,654
    Thanks
    3,182
    Thanked
    4,431 times in 3,424 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    They are supposed to be reliable as long as they are in warranty.



    Whose enterprise drives are those then?

    I think I have seen failures from every drive manufacturer past and present. Remember Quantum? They were really good, but I still had a consumer one where the head fell off.
    Quantum Fireball!! I trust Seagate the least of all the hard drive brands so far TBH.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  9. #9
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    9,111
    Thanks
    422
    Thanked
    916 times in 780 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M5A-97 EVO R2.0
      • CPU:
      • FX-8350
      • Memory:
      • 16GB ECC 1333
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 28 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Quantum Fireball!! I trust Seagate the least of all the hard drive brands so far TBH.
    My first ever hard drive was a Seagate SCSI 30MB (not a typo, megabyte). It was a long time ago, but I think it went back under warranty three times. Some people get nothing but joy from Seagate, but my experience with them hasn't improved.

  10. #10
    "Ultra low end E-PEEN" CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moosetopia
    Posts
    28,654
    Thanks
    3,182
    Thanked
    4,431 times in 3,424 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    My first ever hard drive was a Seagate SCSI 30MB (not a typo, megabyte). It was a long time ago, but I think it went back under warranty three times. Some people get nothing but joy from Seagate, but my experience with them hasn't improved.
    Samsung used to be awesome until in their later years,the reliability just went south. I think the oldest drive that still is probably working is an old 7200RPM IDE WD drive,which ran very hot but kept on going and going.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    London town
    Posts
    247
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked
    13 times in 10 posts

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gagaga View Post
    I think the short conclusion is wow, consumer drives are incredibly reliable now.

    From my own server, i've had 15 8TB seagate drives running for over three years without a single failure - that's 16,000 drive days. Maybe I should publish my own stats?
    They are supposed to be reliable as long as they are in warranty.
    Warranty is 12 months (at least on the early ones) so they are way out of it.

    Of maybe 80 drives i've owned over the years i've only ever had 4 fail - an Hitachi 3TB (ironically of the type Backblaze have found great), a WD 2TB Green and two laptop drives (a Samsung that started losing data and an IBM(!) that sat below the thin plastic wrist rest on a laptop and got squashed.

    My server used to live in the loft and got *hot* in summer (the Hitachi died during this time) .. it now lives in a draughty, damp, unheated cellar and gets cold. Had no problems at all in the past 3 years it's been there with the drives spinning up just fine in sub-zero weather.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,057
    Thanks
    650
    Thanked
    96 times in 82 posts
    • Millennium's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z170 Pro Gamer ATX
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5 6600K @ 4.5GHz 4 core
      • Memory:
      • Corsair VPX 3000 DDR4 (16, 4*4)
      • Storage:
      • 500gb 850 Evo sata3 SSD, 2*2TB Green 5900 Raid 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI 390 8gb
      • PSU:
      • toughpower 1kw
      • Case:
      • Zalman Z3 Plus
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • VIEWSONIC VG2401MH 144hz (Solid)
      • Internet:
      • Origin ADSL Broadband, not really recommended.

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by chinf View Post
    I...

    Among my most recent failed drives were two Seagate ST2000DM001s ...
    ...
    Damn, I'm running 2 ST2000DL003 in Raid 0. Playing with fire! They've been ok on and off for a few years though Maybe SMART will alert me?

    Slightly off topic (maybe) but I've recently got a portable (2.5") 4tb WD My Passport drive for backups mainly. I've heard that 2.5 is much less reliable though, is this true? Should I sell it off and get a full size one? Physical space isn't a problem.
    : n(baby):n(lover):n(sky)|>P(Name)>>not quite

    how do you spend your time online? (Hexus link)

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    London town
    Posts
    247
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked
    13 times in 10 posts

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by Millennium View Post
    Damn, I'm running 2 ST2000DL003 in Raid 0. Playing with fire! They've been ok on and off for a few years though Maybe SMART will alert me?

    Slightly off topic (maybe) but I've recently got a portable (2.5") 4tb WD My Passport drive for backups mainly. I've heard that 2.5 is much less reliable though, is this true? Should I sell it off and get a full size one? Physical space isn't a problem.
    You're asking for pain with RAID0 or RAID5/6 in anything that is not dedicated and left permanently powered up ... I'd split asap unless you've got (very) regular tested backups.

    2.5 - these are way more reliable in my experience for external drives. Especially for backup. If you knock a 2.5 drive whilst it's in use, or drop it you've got a very good chance (as in near 100%) chance it'll be okay as they have movement sensors and fast parking as a result of their design for laptops. Knock a working 3.5 drive and you've a good chance a head crash will spoil your day (they are stupidly robust when parked/spun down, however). I advise everyone to stay away from 3.5" USB drives. There's just no need to take the risk given you can get 5TB 2.5" drives on Amazon for £120 now (I paid that for a 30GB drive VAT free in Japan in 2002...).

  14. Received thanks from:

    Millennium (06-02-2018)

  15. #14
    Gentoo Ricer
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Galway
    Posts
    10,856
    Thanks
    958
    Thanked
    924 times in 687 posts
    • aidanjt's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Strix Z370-G
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-8700K
      • Memory:
      • 2x8GB Corsiar LPX 3000C15
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Samsung 960 EVO
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0
      • PSU:
      • EVGA G3 750W
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define C Mini
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus MG279Q
      • Internet:
      • 240mbps Virgin Cable

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by gagaga View Post
    You're asking for pain with RAID0 or RAID5/6 in anything that is not dedicated and left permanently powered up ... I'd split asap unless you've got (very) regular tested backups.
    No RAID level, JBOD, or single disk arrangement is a safe replacement for backups. Either it's disposable data, or it should be backed up, preferably a local copy and a remote copy, period.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    ...every time Creative bring out a new card range their advertising makes it sound like they have discovered a way to insert a thousand Chuck Norris super dwarfs in your ears...

  16. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where you are not
    Posts
    414
    Thanks
    145
    Thanked
    35 times in 28 posts
    • Iota's system
      • Motherboard:
      • GA-P67A-UD5-B3
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i7 2600K
      • Memory:
      • 2 x BL2KIT25664FN2139
      • Storage:
      • 4 x CTFDDAC064MAG-1G1 (Raid 0)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ASUS Radeon R9 290 DC-2
      • PSU:
      • Corsair Professional Series Gold AX750
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-X500B
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2x Samsung 22" widescreen P2270 2ms DVI HD LCD TFT Ecofit
      • Internet:
      • 40Mbps SKY Fibre

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by aidanjt View Post
    No RAID level, JBOD, or single disk arrangement is a safe replacement for backups. Either it's disposable data, or it should be backed up, preferably a local copy and a remote copy, period.
    Raid 10 isn't terrible if you can afford that many drives, although nothing quite beats having physical backups kept on a regular basis for anything important. I must admit, in all of the years I've run Raid 0, I've only once fallen foul of that option (old Maxtor drives). Samsung drives have been fine, and I do still miss my old raptor drives which for their time were brilliant.

    Roll on affordable SSDs at the capacities we now require.

  17. #16
    “High End” Admin peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    18,550
    Thanks
    2,567
    Thanked
    3,119 times in 2,485 posts
    • peterb's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Nascom 2
      • CPU:
      • Z80B
      • Memory:
      • 48K 8 bit memory on separate card
      • Storage:
      • Audio cassette tape - home built 5.25" floppy drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • text output (composite video)
      • PSU:
      • Home built
      • Case:
      • Home built
      • Operating System:
      • Nas-sys
      • Monitor(s):
      • 12" monocrome composite video input
      • Internet:
      • No networking capability on this machine

    Re: Backblaze shares 2017 HDD reliability stats

    Quote Originally Posted by Iota View Post
    Raid 10 isn't terrible if you can afford that many drives, although nothing quite beats having physical backups kept on a regular basis for anything important. I must admit, in all of the years I've run Raid 0, I've only once fallen foul of that option (old Maxtor drives). Samsung drives have been fine, and I do still miss my old raptor drives which for their time were brilliant.

    Roll on affordable SSDs at the capacities we now require.
    RAID is about resilience and maintaining uptime allowing a failing drive to be swapped out with minimal service interruption (the exception is RAID0 which just doubles the risk of data loss as failure of one drive can affect the data on both). They are not backup substitutes.

    SSD don’t alter that - in fact they increase the need for backup because when they fail, they are (at present) more likely to fail catastrophically rather than giving early warning signs.
    (\__/)
    (='.'=)
    (")_(")

    Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
    My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •