Timeline for Average life of SATA Drives?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 2, 2017 at 16:46 | vote | accept | Damon | ||
| Jan 2, 2017 at 10:49 | comment | added | djsmiley2kStaysInside | Ok, Car Anology time - there's cars from the 1920's that still run. Would you trust yourself to them? Also the fact there's no 10 year data is due to the reasons I pointed out, the people who test on large enough scale to generate this data (google, backblaze) don't run the hardware that long, because it doesn't make sense to do so. Interfaces and technolgy changes mean they move to newer versions before the hardware ever reaches that 10 year point. | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 10:41 | answer | added | Journeyman Geek♦ | timeline score: 9 | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 8:50 | comment | added | djsmiley2kStaysInside | Let us continue this discussion in chat. | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 8:38 | comment | added | Damon | @djsmiley2k namely downtime, possibility of user error during restore, mitigating time array spends in degraded state. We do care about the data, we just work with a budget, like to make informed decisions, and currently have no information on the question at hand. | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 8:31 | comment | added | djsmiley2kStaysInside | then the question arises 'why do you care if the disk is going to fail?' | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 8:22 | comment | added | Damon | @djsmiley2k I'm not sure I agree. SATA I still works on new hardware (SATA III) and they have slowed down on switching things up so often. Not to mention replacing an old failed drive with a new drive on the new SATA interface and adding it to the array is not a problem; further we do not need to find a drive of the same vintage to mitigate a failed drive so no problem there. Also, data recovery would not be needed with mirrors and backups. | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 8:09 | comment | added | djsmiley2kStaysInside | Also the other thing to bear in mind is if you've got a 10 yr old drive, that's likely running SATA 1? At some point it becomes harder to pick up replacement drives 'on the spot' so to speak and also more expensive (if required) to recover data from said drives. | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 8:09 | comment | added | Damon | @djsmiley2k Annualized failure rates for drives 0-5 years old have nothing to do with the average life span of drives and further nothing to do with rates of failure after 5 years. I would agree that life span without corresponding annualized failure rates for a given group is also problematic for making decisions, but where is the data for 5-10 years+? There has got to be many millions of drives, if not billions older than 5 years still running reliably. My assumption is someone somewhere has some insight. | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 7:57 | comment | added | djsmiley2kStaysInside | They tend to fail by usage, not age. So it really really depends on workload. The best data I can think of is that which is provided by backblaze. backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-failure-rates-q2-2016 - No one else I know of publishes anything near this. | |
| Jan 2, 2017 at 7:43 | history | asked | Damon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |