Best Buy WD 10TB w Flash Drive $169.99, now $159.99

Rain

Active Member
May 13, 2013
268
106
43
Do they have tler?
If they're similar to the 8TB shucked Reds & Whites, you can change the TLER setting with hdparm but any changes don't survive after the drive loses power (safe shutdown or otherwise). It's hard to prove whether the any changes are actually doing anything or if the firmware simply ignores them all together.
 

svtkobra7

Active Member
Jan 2, 2017
362
84
28
If they're similar to the 8TB shucked Reds & Whites, you can change the TLER setting with hdparm but any changes don't survive after the drive loses power (safe shutdown or otherwise). It's hard to prove whether the any changes are actually doing anything or if the firmware simply ignores them all together.
It looks like TLER is enabled?

Code:
root@FreeNAS-01[~]# smartctl -a /dev/da3
smartctl 6.6 2017-11-05 r4594 [FreeBSD 11.2-STABLE amd64] (local build)
Copyright (C) 2002-17, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org

=== START OF INFORMATION SECTION ===
Device Model:     WDC WD100EMAZ-00WJTA0
Serial Number:    REDACTED
LU WWN Device Id: 5 000cca 26ccfa395
Firmware Version: 83.H0A83
User Capacity:    10,000,831,348,736 bytes [10.0 TB]
Sector Sizes:     512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical
Rotation Rate:    5400 rpm
Form Factor:      3.5 inches
Device is:        Not in smartctl database [for details use: -P showall] (I requested add - will be in 7.1)
ATA Version is:   ACS-2, ATA8-ACS T13/1699-D revision 4
SATA Version is:  SATA 3.2, 6.0 Gb/s (current: 6.0 Gb/s)
Local Time is:    Thu Feb 14 18:59:48 2019 EST
SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability.
SMART support is: Enabled
Code:
root@FreeNAS-01[~]# smartctl -l scterc /dev/da3
smartctl 6.6 2017-11-05 r4594 [FreeBSD 11.2-STABLE amd64] (local build)
Copyright (C) 2002-17, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org

SCT Error Recovery Control:
           Read:     70 (7.0 seconds)
          Write:     70 (7.0 seconds)
 
  • Like
Reactions: mackle

KC8FLB

Member
Aug 12, 2018
71
55
18
Running
3 8GB reds
2 8GB whites
1 10GB white

In my NAS all from Best buy easy store external drives just like this.

Fantastic value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: svtkobra7

Craash

Active Member
Apr 7, 2017
159
27
28
I'm just into 21 hours of copying date (backup of my backup) to a pair of these in a stripe, over my network. Maximum 6.9Gb/s, Average 2.0Gb/s. Total copied? 17.0 TB. Performance manager shows the array as maxed at 100%
 
  • Like
Reactions: svtkobra7

svtkobra7

Active Member
Jan 2, 2017
362
84
28
I'm just into 21 hours of copying date (backup of my backup) to a pair of these in a stripe, over my network. Maximum 6.9Gb/s, Average 2.0Gb/s. Total copied? 17.0 TB.
  • Nice!
  • I wouldn't put much weight in the maximum figure. 862.5 MB/s is far above the maximum possible performance of 2 of these in a stripe.
  • But the average figure (250 MB/s) foots, i.e. 21 hrs x 60 min x 60 sec = 75,600 sec * 250 MB/s = 18,900,000 MB (or 17.2 TiB).
I only benched my Easystores for raidz1/2/3, but I did more granular testing with slower HGST Deskstar NAS - 6TB drives. I was curious: If 1 drive = X MB/s write speed, then does 12 drives striped = 12 * X MB/s write speed? [1]. As is relevant here, dd showed slightly higher figures for those drives. I suppose that is because raw pool speed was measured without other considerations dragging the numbers down and the fact it was just a benchmark (not real world use).
  • 412 MB/s | sync =disabled | recordsize=128k | compression=off etc (2 HDDs striped)
  • 405 MB/s | sync=disabled | recordsize=1M | compression=off etc (2 HDDs striped)
  • via dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/Tank1/disabled/tmp.dat bs=2048k count=25k. I would have expected the 1M recordsize performance to exceed 128k, but it wasn't until I striped 8+ HDDs where I saw that occur. For mirrored pairs and raidz(x), 1M speed always > 128k speed.
[1] If curious, the answer to my question (at least in my case), was "no" ... calculated MB/s write speed "per disk" (pool speed / # of drives striped) decreased as the number of drives in the stripe increased (secondary axis below). That may be because actual ≠ theoretical, bench methodology (RAM starved system to eliminate cache effect), user error, etc.

 

Craash

Active Member
Apr 7, 2017
159
27
28
Agreed, although higher, the array (raid 0/ same controller) of six 4TB drives I replaced with these did not scale linearly. Benchmarks showed 332 read and 496 write with Seq Q32T1 and 110 read/455 write Seq. I won't mention the 4K performance.

As far as the maximum transfer rate on mine, that is the cache on my controller card, before it is overwhelmed.
 

svtkobra7

Active Member
Jan 2, 2017
362
84
28
I have a feeling I am making at least one trip to Best Buy this weekend.
  • LOL - me too.
  • I had to go to 3 stores + elicit the fiance's help to snag 12 given the limit of 3 drives back in Nov. :mad:
  • It looks like it is a 5 drive limit now = 3 stores as well (for 12x), but at least I won't need her help. Now to figure out how to get a stack of these inside without her noticing. ;)

(last batch)
 
  • Like
Reactions: jfeldt