Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:05:40 -0400 From: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: Mike Woods <Mike@the-rubber-chicken-network.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IDE hard disk recoms Message-ID: <40D08BF4.9060501@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <40D085F6.8010100@the-rubber-chicken-network.co.uk> References: <5313.1087388971@www32.gmx.net> <40D07E1C.10102@mac.com> <40D085F6.8010100@the-rubber-chicken-network.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Woods wrote: > Chuck Swiger wrote: >> Sure. I'd pick up a 7200 RPM ATA drive with 8MB of cache, such as the >> Western Digital WD1200JB. Pick another size (40GB, 80GB, probably >> through 200GB) if you like. > > Seconded, but id get the sata version and a caddy for a server, makes > like easier with changes etc and caddies can be had with extra cooling > fans installed which should help lengthen the life of the drive. If the original poster has SATA hardware support, definitely, he should take advantage of it. I suspect that he has parallel ATA, though. Also, your comments with regard to extra cooling are well-taken: IBM did some research on drive failure rates, and found that a 10C increase in the temperature of the drive enclosure basicly doubled the number of drive failures experienced after 3 years, or something close to that. >> Seagate and Maxtor are also pretty good names; the former tends to be >> more expensive and higher performing, the latter are quiet, a little >> slow, but generally reliable and cheap. > > I dont know about today but seagate drives used to have real longevity > problems years ago (back in my amiga days :)) Yes, Seagates generally go for three or four years or so and then start showing gradual failures (ie, uncorrectable data errors from bad sectors) which accelerate in frequency until the drive becomes unusable. I've still got a 1GB Micropolis 2112 from 1990 that's in pretty good shape, I wish they were still around. >> The IBM UltraStar models are quite good, whereas the DeskStars have >> dubious reliability, and Quantum made the term "stiction" famous more >> than a decade ago with the Q105 SCSI drives that wouldn't spin up, so >> I wouldn't rely on that vendor either. > > IBM fixed the problems with the deskstars long ago (with the gxp120) and > all the drives since have been known to be reliable drives with good > preformance for a nice price, also hitachi own the deskstars now. I'd heard about IBM and Hitachi partnering on drives, but I (obviously :-) forgot some of the details. > As for quantum, you've recomended them above :) > > Maxtor bought quantums hard dive division years ago and most maxtor > drives since are basicly quantum designs or derivertives off them :) I remember a little about that as well, which was why I was dubious about WD drives two or three years ago when I first started experimenting with their new SE/JB line, but they've proven to be pretty solid devices since. I still wouldn't get a drive with the Quantum brand name on it today, however... -- -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40D08BF4.9060501>