darn, exactly this is what i had in mind for an offer ..Had my offer of 20 drives for $600 accepted an hour or so ago... At $30 a drive I really hope this is legit....
darn, exactly this is what i had in mind for an offer ..Had my offer of 20 drives for $600 accepted an hour or so ago... At $30 a drive I really hope this is legit....
sure. there's many ways to test. it's just that i usually test with the final configuration, in this case a 8xHDD ZFS raidz2, and then i noticed the sequential writes were pretty poor compared to the systems with the HGST 4TB SATA drives. anyway, i was just trying to confirm it was the drives without changing too many variables so I had a better apples vs apples comparison.couldn't you have tested this with only one drive and dd?
Damn! Please tell me this is work related and not for your home? If it is for home, 224TB existing plus another 240TB coming means you need to show us some sexy home server pics!I'm in for 80, they appear to support the t10 data protection stuff which when used with a compatible controller detects/corrects data integrity issues end to end. Seems like an insane deal, hopefully no surprises.
I have a few of the encryption version of these (a 1 instead of 0 at end of model number), and they do run a bit hot. Since I just recently got 26 8TB drives I hesitated a bit, but could not resist. I think I'll be set storage wise for a while... XD
the HUS724030ALS640 drives have 512 sectors, which I specifically checked when i got them. however, they have IBM branded firmware; that might be the only difference I can speculate on to explain the write performance difference; but I don't know why IBM would do something to the firmware of these drives to make them perform poorly vs the regular HGST firmware? in a way, this is why I'm posting here to see if others with these 3TB drives are experiencing the same issue or if it is just the set of drives I have that have poor write performance?can't imagine these are so much slower, had only results ,as expected' with hgst hdd. maybe smth with the Pool isn't 100% right and you have write amplification. have you looked at sector sizes and ashift?
Semi work related, I run a large-ish reverse image search engine (SauceNAO.com) and have to acquire a lot of data for indexing purposes. The whole setup is pretty hacky, but here is a pic of my 'desktop pc' rack:Damn! Please tell me this is work related and not for your home? If it is for home, 224TB existing plus another 240TB coming means you need to show us some sexy home server pics!
if it doesn't / is wrong it could exactly explain what you seethese days I believe ZoL takes care of that automatically
How to ship a few hundred? In 20er boxes?The seller: sellitoff508 has around 900 3TB drives left out of 1048. No need to hurry. I might buy a few hundred if he offers me decent prices, if anyone in EU needs let me know.
7k3000 vs 7k4000; jumped a drive gen. Same platter and headcount for 1TB more capacity, so more data under the head each rev. Both 512n or 512n vs 4k?I have 18 of these drives in a couple of systems. I don't seem to get very good write performance on them. Anyone else noticed this? For example, 8x HDD in ZFS raidz2, doing a 40GB sequential write to them sustains around 400MB/sec. Sequential read seems to be "okay", at around 800MB/sec.
In contrast, I have two other systems with 8x HDD (HGST 4TB SATA 7200RPM from 2014), similar raidz2, and I get 1GB/sec sequential reads, and about 800MB/sec sequential writes.
All systems have LSI SAS2008 based controller with a Supermicro 825TQ backplane.
there you go!!! that i think is the answer...7k3000 vs 7k4000; jumped a drive gen. Same platter and headcount for 1TB more capacity, so more data under the head each rev. Both 512n or 512n vs 4k?
btw, just to complete the conversation on this topic, I went back and checked the ashift and sector size. it was correct, on these HUS723030ALS640 drives, it reported 512b sectors, and ashift=9. on the 4TB HUS724040ALE640 drives, it repoted 4k physical/512b logical sectors, and ashift=12. So, ZoL did pick the correct ashift.can't imagine these are so much slower, had only results ,as expected' with hgst hdd. maybe smth with the Pool isn't 100% right and you have write amplification. have you looked at sector sizes and ashift?
I'm selling my supermicro 45 bay if you're interested.Semi work related, I run a large-ish reverse image search engine (SauceNAO.com) and have to acquire a lot of data for indexing purposes. The whole setup is pretty hacky, but here is a pic of my 'desktop pc' rack:
http://xamayon.net/rack2.jpg
Pic is pretty old at this point. I've had to stack chassis elsewhere since I'm out of rack space... Now I'll need to get a few more of the supermicro 45+ drive bay chassis when they are cheap again.
yeah, i've been in communications with the seller. i think they are legit; don't know how much experience they have selling computer gear, but i don't think this is a scam. i just think they listed the wrong model hard drive - they are selling the 7K3000 generation HGST drive not the 7K4000The seller sent me a message on ebay asking me to confirm that I knew these were SAS drives (and not SATA) ! A very proactive thing to do... makes me even more confident that this is legit....