sherik.net

  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
Home > Hard Drive > Having Troubles With 8Tb Seagate Drives

Having Troubles With 8Tb Seagate Drives

Contents

Our Q3 switch to 60-drive Storage Pods signals the end of the line for our 45-drive systems. I tried 3 different SATA cables and 2 different ports on the PCIe card with no success. Back to top #4 JohnC_21 JohnC_21 Members 17,367 posts ONLINE Local time:01:07 PM Posted 15 September 2016 - 08:27 PM Detach all the USB external drives. Suggestions? my review here

HGST (and SSD) for production and NAS, Seagate for backup destination is a perfectly fine approach IMO. 0 Poblano OP TomMLS Feb 9, 2015 at 5:08 UTC They What's New? Then I would hide the relevant driver update so the OEM driver is not replaced again with the Microsoft driver. Seagate External Drive Not Waking in Drivers and Hardware I have a Seagate external drive that I save my backups to.

8tb Hard Drive External

Read about what it is here. This could have just been a batch problem with the drives we received, as they were very close to first off the line. Matt Viverette Are you selling the 45-drive pods at a discount (without the drives, of course)? The comment that "The models that have an annualized failure rate of 0% had zero hard drive failures in Q3…" makes it sound like it's for the 3 month period.

  • CPU: Intel i7 4770 3,4GHz; M/B: Asus Z87 Deluxe; RAM: 32GB GSKILL Ripjaws X 2133MHz; GPU: Asus GTX1070OC ROG Strix 8GB; Monitor: Samsung P2770 27" 2ms 1080p; Storage: 1x Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, 1x WD Black 2TB, 1x WD Blue 500GB, 1x WD
  • If you have Windows 8 or 10 you may need to disable SecureBoot.
  • Do you have a Linux Distro you can look at the drive with?
  • It still won't appear under Disk Management, however it does appear under Device Manager and it shows under "Properties" and "events" that at 2:21: Device Started(disk), Device Configured(disk.inf), Device Not Migrated,
  • Object storage typically provides data protection with multi-node replication or with erasure coding.
  • The label simply supplies the product name, company logo, and a QR code that navigates to the product website.
  • Aside from that, it sounds like this is a compatibility issue here.
  • This wave was smaller but continued the process of moving data from the remaining 2 TB hard drives to the 8 TB based systems.
  • I was researching SMR for a NAS which led me to here.

Back to top #10 JohnC_21 JohnC_21 Members 17,367 posts ONLINE Local time:01:07 PM Posted 19 September 2016 - 06:17 PM There may be a non-present driver that is conflicting with Terms & Privacy Enter the characters you see below Sorry, we just need to make sure you're not a robot. I have 2 SSDs (240Gb each) and a few 3Tb and 4Tb drives. 8tb Hard Drive Nas Do you destroy them, sell them on ebay after wiping them, sell them to the manufacturer for them to sell them as refurbished drives?

coolspot What does it matter - a failure is a failure? 8tb Hard Drive Internal JBOD?? A bad data cable can cause I/O errors and incompatibilities. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/626938/problems-with-my-seagate-8tb-external-drive/ Sustained write performance in this case is a weaknessthat we see throughoutthe rest of our tests.

A file manager window will open and show all your files. Seagate Archive 8tb Review In the Backblaze post they are only talking about consumer grade hard drives. Moving the max latency, the Seagate Archive posted max read and write latency at 212,065ms and 5,088ms respectively. Also the POST screen delay is unjustified.

8tb Hard Drive Internal

In this system we installed 8 Archive HDDswithout RAID and addressed them individually inside Windows Server 2012 R2. The sides of the Seagate Archive HDD feature a total of four screw holes, which allows us to mount the drive. 8tb Hard Drive External It also is more granular then RAID. 8tb Hard Drive Western Digital I think I was right to have the doubts. I noticed the following issues after only a few hours of meddling with the drive:1) The POST delays, and it delays dramatically compared

From anecdotal evidence, I can only share the same experience you have had: Desktop Seagate plates seem to fail more often than other manufacturers. http://sherik.net/hard-drive/has-two-hard-drives.php I would like to start using 8-10TB drives, but this means the amount of magnetic particles storing a bit is much lower than the current 2TB drives (3 and 4 platter First Name Last Name Email Join Now or Log In Oops, something's wrong below. share Link to post Share on other sites Nasty Pirate Nasty Pirate    Member 46 posts Location: Athens, Greece Posted October 16, 2015 · Original PosterOP this is a write once Seagate St8000dm002

AMD's response was terse, broken English that seemed to tell me to contact ASUS for a driver -- I shot back that all ASUS does is put their logo on AMD's Should have bought the cheaper HGST….. Load up Disk Management Post a screenshot of your disk management page. get redirected here Follow us: Cloud backup.

It also delays on simple Excel files.5) Checked the drive with CrystalDiskInfo and HDtune and the results were very acceptable (average 170MB/sec, burst of 309MB/s). 16 Terabyte Hard Drive Read about what it is here. The Archive HDD’s read performance was on par, and even ahead of, the other drives tested.

The 2 TB HGST drives had performed very well.

You'd also need to get "breakout cables" as well (which amazon links), but you can immediately hook up 8 drives with this card. When I played with the 8TB/10TB drives, I ran into Windows wanting to configure them as NTFS and not GPT. @ OP Below I quoted Chris in regards to Posting Permissions You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are Seagate Archive Hdd 8tb Windows 7 (unactivated) Windows 10 (Preview 10240 unactivated) Debian (was just trying this out a couple days before Windows 10 officially released)...

We then kicked off a second wave of migrations. Drive migration and hard drive failure rates A four-fold storage density increase takes care of much of the math in justifying the migration project. Back to top BC AdBot (Login to Remove) BleepingComputer.com Register to remove ads #2 hamluis hamluis Moderator Moderator 52,405 posts ONLINE Gender:Male Location:Killeen, TX Local time:12:07 PM Posted 15 useful reference The trade off however is that performance can at times be unpredictable, as the drive is forced to run its background processes with no input or communication with the OS.

By creating an account, you're agreeing to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy Not a member? Since the threads are spread all over the forum it is kind of difficult to keep an overview of just how many people are actually... Thank you, Tom 1 Thai Pepper OP Robert3914 Feb 9, 2015 at 6:26 UTC Startech Business Systems Ltd. When looking at average latency benchmark (CIFS) 16 Thread 16 Queue 100% read and write, the Seagate Archive measured 497.07ms read and 206.06ms write.

On that note, have you considered direct wiring to a custom port multiplier chassis instead of boilting the multiplers directly under the drives? Sign In Now Sign in to follow this Followers 1 Go To Topic Listing Storage Devices Recently Browsing 0 members No registered users viewing this page. Our last Enterprise Synthetic Workload is comprised ofa 128K large block sequential test that shows the highest sequential transfer speed for a platter drive. You may have to format it as 2x 4TB Drives, which is obnoxious, I know.

I returned it to the store in order to get another one. That said using these drives in a object storage based infrastructure again for archive should be ideal. I contacted both SYBA and AMD regarding drivers -- SYBA was very responsive but they said they are at the mercy of getting drivers from Marvell, who makes their chipset -- Best Sondre John S.

DM just sits there with "Connecting to Virtual Disk Service". Merged topics - Hamluis. Thanks everyone for the answers. In our average latency benchmark, the Seagate Archive 8TB drive posted 370.04ms at 2 Threads 2 Queue while hitting 22,453.89ms by the end of the test.