I have not had issues with reliability and I have quite a few of the Crucial drives. What I have seen is that the M500 480GB drives (overprovisioned down to 420GB) still have some long service times on read/ write requests. The new servers are in the DC which will bring higher-end SAS/ SATA (S3700) drives to fix the service time problem which is impacting a non-negligible portion of traffic to the sites.I don't think I've heard the whole story about this reliability problem everyone seems to keep talking about on STH. Everywhere else says they are excellent.
I'm all ears. I don't even own one. I own three OCZ drive, an intel drive, a samsung drive, and a kingston drive. I don't really have a vested interest in disagreeing with you, but I would like to hear STH's side of the story here.
This - and doubly so on SAS controllers. I've found the M500's to be one of the most stable drives. At work there's maybe 200 and we've had 1 rma.I have not had issues with reliability and I have quite a few of the Crucial drives. What I have seen is that the M500 480GB drives (overprovisioned down to 420GB) still have some long service times on read/ write requests.
You must not do write workloads on them... Might I ask what servers and what controllers?This - and doubly so on SAS controllers. I've found the M500's to be one of the most stable drives. At work there's maybe 200 and we've had 1 rma.
I'm still buying Samsung or Intel drives.
Wow, that's really impressive. Like @Patriot, I'm curious what kind of workload you're doing on them.This - and doubly so on SAS controllers. I've found the M500's to be one of the most stable drives. At work there's maybe 200 and we've had 1 rma.
I'm still buying Samsung or Intel drives.
Customer specified... can't go into details but they were FIO sync lib .... so Q=1 ~3k iops normally but GC would fire up and drop it below 10...Wow, that's really impressive. Like @Patriot, I'm curious what kind of workload you're doing on them.