[Beowulf] real hard drive failures
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Karen Shaeffer shaeffer at neuralscape.comTue Jan 25 11:21:21 PST 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] real hard drive failures
- Next message: [Beowulf] real hard drive failures
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 10:16:33AM -0600, Donald Kinghorn wrote: > WD 120 and 200GB SATA in the field <1 year, [~400 drives] one failure so far. > > I'm moving to a 3 drive raid5 setup on each node (drives are cheap, down time > is not) and considering changing to Seagate SATA drives anyone care to offer > opinions or more anecdotes? :-) Hi Don, For 250 GB SATA drives, I would recommend either Hitachi or Seagate. Hitachi drives may exhibit nominally better performance numbers. For 400GB SATA drives, I don't have enough experience to recommend anything, but I have used 400 GB Hitachi SATA drives recently and all is going well at this time. It's too early to draw conclusions. Thanks, Karen -- Karen Shaeffer Neuralscape, Palo Alto, Ca. 94306 shaeffer at neuralscape.com http://www.neuralscape.com
- Previous message: [Beowulf] real hard drive failures
- Next message: [Beowulf] real hard drive failures
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
