On 24/4/25 15:11, Roger Price wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025, jeremy ardley wrote:
On 24/4/25 14:58, Roger Price wrote:
A cheapo Seagate in one of my RAID 1's now has well over 90000
hours. Only the WDs have failed.
Were the WDs Red? There is a major difference in life with them
No, I use Green (Desktop) WDs. The WD Green in the box on which I am typing
this has 57000 hours. I always mix Seagate and WD Greens. Roger
Green are the 'Eco' model with lower power and speed and life.
Red are the NAS Specific model and have extra features dedicated RAID
controller can use, but their main claim to fame is longevity under
continual use.
In my case I had a QNAP two-drive NAS. It was stupendously slow and I
eventually replaced the QNAP firmware with old Debian firmware for the
obsolete armv5tel chip it runs.
The problem in the two-bay QNAP firmware is a disk failure is not self
healing so you have to backup the working drive, disassemble the case
and replace the failed drive, and then format the two as a new RAID
array and then reload the backed up data. A royal pain.This is why I use
WD Red as I'm not going through all that Palaver every couple of years.
Larger models have front removable bays and can rebuild the RAID after
failure, but they are still dead slow.
My current QNAP hardware has been running the same WD Red drives since
2015 and are at 88,104 hours and 161,778 Load Cycle and 54,237
start-stop cycles.
