Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 01:10:08 -0700 From: "K Anderson" <freebsduser@comcast.net> To: "Sandy Rutherford" <sandy@krvarr.bc.ca>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Stored hard drive failure? Message-ID: <003101c5c984$362cf830$0c64a8c0@opteron> References: <000301c5c97c$5b735560$0c64a8c0@opteron><2926BCC8-0AF2-483E-BDB1-CF2E30EC4558@shire.net><001f01c5c980$a3030c50$0c64a8c0@opteron> <17219.34877.306826.523289@szamoca.krvarr.bc.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandy Rutherford" <sandy@krvarr.bc.ca> To: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Cc: "K Anderson" <freebsduser@comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 1:01 AM Subject: Re: Stored hard drive failure? >>>>>> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 00:44:36 -0700, >>>>>> "K Anderson" <freebsduser@comcast.net> said: > > > Not sure how long I'm storing them (See above question where I asked -- > > How > > long can the HD sit on the shelf... and the other questions seemed to > > be > > editted out). But you're right the info could become out-of-date unless > > when > > I did patch management then I would pull the stored HD off the shelf and > > hope that it didn't fail because of non-use and re-mirror the main drive > > then stored the secondary back on the shelf. But then that really > > doens't > > hit the other two questions that were editted out. > > > Perhaps if somebody had experience with doing the very scenario I > > thought > > of. I know HDs can be touchy but how touchy can they get if they are > > just > > sitting on the shelf waiting for resuse and me going, darn that HD is > > bad > > now that it sat on the shelf for X number of [days|weeks|months|years]. > > See the thread: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=642921+0+/usr/local/www/db/text/2005/freebsd-questions/20050911.freebsd-questions > > I have definitely noticed a higher failure rate among drives that have > been stored for a number of months. I can't give you any hard > numbers, nor should you really believe them even if I did, because this > depends on age of the drive, model, design, etc. > > If you are serious about data redundancy, why not simply set up RAID 1 > volumes? They will provide much better redundancy, at a minimal extra > cost, and with less work required on your part to maintain the > mirrors. > > Sandy Sandy, Thanks that's the thread I was looking for. The reason I asked the question was to find out about powered down hard drives. Got a friend who does a scheme with a drive and leaves it powered down but I didn't want to sound like a loon when I asked him how often does he spin the drive up to test its integrity. Right about the RAID 1 thing though. Thanks again Sandy. ~Mr. Anderson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?003101c5c984$362cf830$0c64a8c0>