From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org  Fri Sep 25 13:12:06 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA122A0858C
 for <freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Fri, 25 Sep 2015 13:12:06 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from allan@physics.umn.edu)
Received: from mail.physics.umn.edu (smtp.spa.umn.edu [128.101.220.4])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACEE71F89
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Fri, 25 Sep 2015 13:12:06 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from allan@physics.umn.edu)
Received: from c-66-41-25-68.hsd1.mn.comcast.net ([66.41.25.68]
 helo=[192.168.0.107])
 by mail.physics.umn.edu with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128)
 (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <allan@physics.umn.edu>)
 id 1ZfSn8-000ObR-Ld
 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:11:58 -0500
Subject: Re: zfs performance degradation
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
References: <56019211.2050307@dim.lv>
 <37A37E9D-9D65-4553-BBA2-C5B032163499@kraus-haus.org>
 <56038054.5060906@dim.lv>
 <782C9CEF-BE07-4E05-83ED-133B7DA96780@kraus-haus.org> <56040150.90403@dim.lv>
 <60BF2FC3-0342-46C9-A718-52492303522F@kraus-haus.org>
 <560412B2.9070905@dim.lv>
 <8D1FF55C-7068-4AB6-8C0E-B4E64C1BB5FA@kraus-haus.org>
 <56042209.8040903@dim.lv>
 <2008181C-F0B5-4581-9D15-11911A1DE41B@kraus-haus.org>
 <CAFYkXjkdUrcUUdVQW4qgSuEmtifD=mvbvf4k0vq5t9R6dtR1pQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <6498A090-A2A2-4580-A148-2BCBF68BF2BF@kraus-haus.org>
From: Graham Allan <allan@physics.umn.edu>
Message-ID: <5605481D.10902@physics.umn.edu>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:11:57 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6498A090-A2A2-4580-A148-2BCBF68BF2BF@kraus-haus.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 13:12:06 -0000

On 9/24/2015 7:58 PM, Paul Kraus wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2015, at 17:40, CeDeROM <cederom@tlen.pl> wrote:
>
>> For RAID/NAS use ondy WD RED drives family :-) Others WILL break
>> timings with hidden error verify mechanisms..
>>
>> http://www.wdc.com/red
>
> I assume you are referring to the other “color” drives. I have had no
> issues with the RE and SE series of Datacenter drives in zpool
> configurations.

WD Reds are pretty solid, and I have used hundreds of them in ZFS pools 
without *apparent* issues, while I would never consider the blue or even 
less Green for this. However they're still a low-cost option - if I'd 
had the funds I would much rather have used SE or RE!