In an effort to cut costs (broke and in college here), I won an auction for three 2TB Seagate ST2000DM001 drives. I was only interested because it seemed decent to get a few 2TB drives for $25-30 each, but my dumb ass didn't realize how old they were.
The seller said that they tested them with this: hdsentinel.com, and everything passed 100%. I'm still concerned though because these drives are old as hell, so won't they be prone to failure sooner?
I guess I should just pony up the money for a refurbished 3TB with a warranty :/
Buying used drives is just fine. He needs to make backups in case one of them fails, yes, but he'd have to do that with brand new drives, too, since any drive, of any brand or any model, used or new, can fail at any time with no warning.
Eli Hill
The smartest thing OP can do is back them up on each other, or use a magnet to make them last longer
David Rogers
I was thinking about using the magnet trick to be honest
Lincoln Wilson
>check for smart errors using smartctl (linux) or crystaldiskinfo (windows) >look at the power on hours too to get an idea of how heavily they've been used >get two 3.5" HDD enclosures >put one disk in your machine (preferably the least used one), use the remaining two as backups (put them in the enclosures and only connect them when you do backups so they aren't running all the time)
Blake Morales
RAID 5
Luke Williams
If I'm understanding this properly,
I can take the three 2TB drives, throw them in RAID 5, and then have 4TB total with a fault tolerance of one drive?
Luis Torres
Just do raid 0 for Superior performance and getting the full 6TB
Hudson Powell
Performance isn't my concern, and RAID 0 is not ideal because I'd lose my data if a drive fails. I don't have any drives to backup that 6TB. RAID 5 seems like a possibility though.
Logan Morris
you're dumb.
this. /thread
Levi Adams
nah. 3-way RAID 0. no backup
seriously though OP. just do RAID 1 and use the third drive as an offline backup. redundancy and backup is about as good as you get. save the drive with the least power on hours for your backup.
all the drives pictured here, besides the ssd and the 8TB ones are refurbed server drives, running practically 24/7 for the past 2 years. no issues yet, and no smart errors last i checked.
Think that's what I'm going to do. Had no clue I'd be able to view power on hours and everything. Storage is definitely an area I needed some more knowledge in, so I appreciate all the help!
Parker Russell
Don't listen to RAID 0 fags, OP! The disks are old, one of them fill fail and all 6TB of data is gone. If you don't have another 6TB for backup, don't ever think about RAID 0. Also, think about recovery time objective.
John Cox
Yeah I had no plan on following through with the RAID 0 suggestions. RAID 1 if anything with the third drive as an offline backup frequently being updated might be the move.
Luke Williams
Dude, in RAID 1 + backup you are wasting 4 TB with no performance improvements. While on RAID 5 you loose only 2TB for parity, and you will have some performance boosts. If your platform supports it, I would go with RAID 5.
Aiden Powell
If he got 2TB drives he's probably storing media on them. Which means that performance basically doesn't matter, on hard drive without RAID would be fast enough. In any case putting HDDs in RAID for extra speed is one of the most pointless things you can do in this day and age, if you care about things being fast that much, you put them on an SSD instead. Typically anything you care that much about making fast will be small enough to fit on one.
Also "if your platform supports it" is a dangerous suggestion. Never, ever use hardware RAID. Especially not the "fake" hardware RAID that some mobo controllers have integrated. Why? Ask yourself if you'd be able to access the array if you needed to reinstall your OS. Of if the mobo died and you needed to replace it. Or how you'd be notified of a failed drive. You want software RAID, it doesn't have these pitfalls.
Anthony Clark
I've got one: I bought a Ryzen 7 2700U laptop because fuck it, it was on sale after Christmas, it had a good iGPU, and it had four cores with hyperthreading in a decent laptop (the HP one). Spent just over $700 on the thing and expected it to at least keep up with a $1500 Core i7-4770HQ laptop with a GTX860M inside.
Fucking nope. Radeon drivers caused the whole system to lock and then crash every few days and no update would fix the stability issue on Windows 10. The CPU would not stay at boost frequency on all cores for longer than a few seconds before dropping like a rock, even when the temperatures never strayed above 75 degrees thanks to a laptop stand I had with a 200mm fan blowing on the bottom. And, the fucking thing came with a 5400rpm hard drive. In 2017/2018.
I should have gotten a Kaby Lake quad core instead. It might cost a little more, but I wouldn't have this level of buyer's remorse right now.
Josiah Baker
scan for loli porn. if you're that concern, raid it. or use one of them as back up.
Zachary Adams
Use a tool for wipe those HDDS. Then you'll be fine using them for personal shit
Blake Hernandez
OP, the original ST2000DM001 drives were produced when Seagate was cranking out drives that failed after a few months. They're generally considered as drives that should be avoided.
The good news is that it was a software bug that caused drive failures, and Seagate has published fixed firmware since then. When you get the drives go get the latest firmware and reflash. They're reasonably reliable after that's taken care of.
Jaxson Hall
Yeah I heard about those issues, but it seemed to primarily affect the 3TB models. I'll still be sure to reflash everything though! Thanks.
Jackson Sanchez
maybe get a fan for your drive bay. i'd be sperging out over a 46°c hdd
Jayden Gonzalez
syke glowing nigga, you shilled in the wrong thread!
Carson Turner
>buy used server for cheap >smells like smoke >remove RAM and xeon into the trash it goes
David Perez
He sounds more "retard who had absolutely no idea what he was doing" than Intelaviv paid shill.
Thomas Cruz
I have the same drive make sure you do a long smartctl scan of the drive. Mine had only 2 bad sectors, but recently done a scan and now reports 56 be careful
