Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Differences between prosumer and enterprise Hard Disk Drives ?  (Read 1999 times)
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1798



WWW
« on: November 12, 2012, 09:44:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Does anyone have good links to discussions of real world actual operating experiences between enterprise and other classes of hard disk drives?
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Sareesh Sudhakaran
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 547


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2012, 10:23:53 AM »
ReplyReply

The backblaze blog is excellent. In short, the failure rate of both is similar. But the way files are handled might not be - enterprise drives must perform well under random reads/writes. It is impossible to make a sweeping statement, especially when there are all kinds of options.

Hope this helps.
Logged

Get the Free Comprehensive Guide to Rigging ANY Camera - one guide to rig them all - DSLRs to the Arri Alexa.
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2227



WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2012, 03:09:06 PM »
ReplyReply

The two big differences are the Enterprise (RAID specific) drives have beefier bearing and lubrication mechanisms to deal with 24/7 power, where consumer grade drives are designed for downtime daily.  The RAID drives also have more vibration compensation to deal with multiple drive mounts, which introduce a lot more chassis vibration and can cause errors.
Logged

John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2012, 04:33:09 PM »
ReplyReply

The distinction is increasingly becoming blurred.

Enterprise drives are designed for high reliability and constant use.  Despite this stated goal, Google's landmark reliablity survey found little to no difference compared to desktop class drives:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=googles%20drive%20reliability%20survey&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fresearch.google.com%2Farchive%2Fdisk_failures.pdf&ei=33ShUKHnFIbgiwKE64GIAQ&usg=AFQjCNGdAu5mMDlzXvPg0CSZPH6HavPX3g

They are also designed to be used in RAID environment, where array error correction is handled by the host controller or system.  Desktop drives will typically spend a much greater length of time in error recovery, causing issues in RAID configurations - I went over this in more detail here:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=68739.msg550690#msg550690

We are offering our clients a choice between SAS or SATA when configuring a server, for SATA we'll recommend WD's 10K-rpm Velociraptors, for SAS, Seagate or HP (Hitachi) 15K-rpm

When we're talking about SSD, the desktop drives use MLC NAND storage, where individual storage bits are grouped - a single delete operation takes out the entire group. TRIM is needed to free up previously allocated space -  (basically aggregate groups with "deleted" member bytes - ... brutally oversimplified...). 

Enterprise SSD's use SLC NAND - each storage byte is individually addressable.  No TRIM is required.  Enterprise SSD has a much larger amount of overprovisioning and typically has a much higher PE rating:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-reliability-failure-rate,2923.html



Logged

Craig Lamson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 765



WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 12, 2012, 05:33:46 PM »
ReplyReply

John

What do you  think of the WD reds?   Just installed a Synology 1812+ nas and WD 3tb Reds.  No problems just curious.
Logged

Craig Lamson Photo
www.craiglamson.com
tived
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 691


WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 12, 2012, 07:42:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Craig
I have the same setup for some time now and so far the combination has been good.

Henrik
Logged
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2012, 11:42:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Craig:  Reds are highly recommended - great value and verified by all common RAID vendors:

http://wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=810
Logged

K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« Reply #7 on: November 19, 2012, 12:52:26 AM »
ReplyReply

http://www.storagereview.com/
Logged
PierreVandevenne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 19, 2012, 06:48:29 AM »
ReplyReply

When we're talking about SSD, the desktop drives use MLC NAND storage, where individual storage bits are grouped - a single delete operation takes out the entire group. TRIM is needed to free up previously allocated space -  (basically aggregate groups with "deleted" member bytes - ... brutally oversimplified...). 
Enterprise SSD's use SLC NAND - each storage byte is individually addressable.  No TRIM is required.  Enterprise SSD has a much larger amount of overprovisioning and typically has a much higher PE rating:
[/quote]

About TRIM: it works at the NAN page level, not at the cell level. It is as needed on today's SLC enterprise drives as it is on MLC non enterprise ones. SLC is single level per cell, MLC originally meant multi level per cell but is now taken as a synonim for 2 levels per cells. The latest Samsung range (the 840) now uses TLC, 3 levels per cell. The drawback is less charge per level and therefore less reliability on a per cell level and also less speed.

TRIM/UNMAP on enterprise drives

http://www.oczenterprise.com/ssd-products/deneva-2-r-sata-6g-2.5-slc.html
http://www.stec-inc.com/support/searchresults.php?cx=018217438920633655538%3A78ha_25djlm&cof=FORID%3A9&q=TRIM

The reason that it seemed there was no apparent TRIM/UNMAP notion on SLC enterprise drives are many. TRIM essentially gives the OS access to some aspects of the drive garbage collection mechanisms. It wasn't needed on drives that had small pages and were always doing intensive garbage collection in the background (basically because they were fast enough to saturate their interface to the world with power to spare for the hidden tasks). Also I/O accelerators as the high end enterprise SSDs are often called are essentially black boxes with no direct exposure to the OS, so there is no need to support an explicitly addressable external TRIM command because there's no OS to use it.

SLC/MLC/TMC summary

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6337/samsung-ssd-840-250gb-review/2

As far as hard drives are concerned

enterprise class hard drives (say RE vs Caviar) are supposed to offer better MTBF, number or load/unload cycles, better vibrational tolerance, etc... All of this is hard for consumers to verify and as it has been pointed out large scale results have been mixed (worth noting: the Google study is now a bit dated and was
also in direct contradiction with IBM studies on the temperature-reliability issue). As an end-user, it is hard to take an informed decision based on the above. Vibration damping should have an impact on performance in absolute terms because it should diminish the number of seek errors, but this is not a feature you can turn on and off in a single drive to check.

Two of the characteristics of the enterprise drives were of interest to customers: the "idle timing" and the error-correction behaviour.

idle timing controls when and how frequently the heads will be "parked" - that an unload/load cycle. Consumer grade drives park frequently after a small duration of inactivity (which is a good thing from a safety and power management pov). But that's a bad thing in NAS and other environments because drives constantly park/unpark.

the error-correction behaviour (Time Limited Error Recovery) leads a consumer drive to very quickly accept a sector as bad when it has difficulties reading it. This may incorrectly invalidate a physical drive in a RAID environment - the controller is willing to wait but the disk already has stopped trying - and that can cause inconveniences or even major catastrophies.

The WD RED series addresses those two issues, at a lower cost than the RE series, and supposedly has better balanced platters (less vibrations), a slightly improved MTBF and a better warranty. Well worth the price differential vs standard drives.

One last thing, but that is the cynic in me talking... the parameters of older WD drives (and other brands) could be adjusted through specific utilities (wdidle was one) and, in some periods, came with better warranties than current WD Red drives. WD Red drives warranties are looking like good value in comparison to standard warranties, but those have been significantly reduced in the recent years. Except for the unverifiable "better balanced platters" issue, the RED thing could be mostly a marketing/product positionning issue.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad