• GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    no thanks Seagate. the trauma of losing my data because of a botched firmware with a ticking time bomb kinda put me off your products for life.

    see you in hell.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Can someone recommend me a hard drive that won’t fail immediately? Internal, not SSD, from which cheap ones will die even sooner, and I need it for archival reasons, not speed or fancy new tech, otherwise I have two SSDs.

      • Ushmel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        My WD Red Pros have almost all lasted me 7+ years but the best thing (and probably cheapest nowadays) is a proper 3-2-1 backup plan.

      • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        If you’re relying on one hard drive not failing to preserve your data you are doing it wrong from the jump. I’ve got about a dozen hard drives in play from seagate and WD at any given time (mostly seagate because they’re cheaper and I don’t need speed either) and haven’t had a failure yet. Backblaze used to publish stats about the hard drives they use, not sure if they still do but that would give you some data to go off. Seagate did put out some duds a while back but other models are fine.

      • daq@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Hard drives aren’t great for archival in general, but any modern drive should work. Grab multiple brands and make at least two copies. Look for sales. Externals regularly go below $15/tb these days.

        • Ushmel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Word for the wise, those externals usually won’t last 5+ years of constant use as an internal.

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          they were selling wd red (pro?) drives with smr tech, which is known to be disastrous for disk arrays because both traditional raid and zfs tends to throw them out. the reason for that is when you are filling it up, especially when you do it quickly, it won’t be able to process your writes after some time, and write operations will take a very long time, because the disk needs to rearrange its data before writing more. but raid solutions just see that the drive is not responding to the write command for a long time, and they think that’s because the drive is bad.

          it was a few years ago, but it was a shitfest because they didn’t disclose it, and people were expecting that nas drives will work fine in their nas.

          • Ushmel@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 hour ago

            I’ve had a couple random drop from my array recently, but they were older so I didn’t think twice about it. Does this permafry them or can you remove from the array and reinitiate for it to work?

      • skankhunt42@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        In my case, 10+years ago I had 6 * 3tb Seagate disks in a software raid 5. Two of them failed and it took me days to force it back into the raid and get some of the data off. Now I use WD and raid 6.

        I read 3 or 4 years ago that it was just the 3tb reds I used had a high failure rate but I’m still only buying WDs