Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Data Storage Stats

Ask Slashdot: Do You Test Your New Hard Drives? 348

An anonymous reader writes "Any Slashdot thread about drive failure is loaded with good advice about EOL — but what about the beginning? Do you normally test your new purchases as thoroughly as you test old, suspect drives? Has your testing followed the proverbial 'bathtub' curve of a lot of early failures, but with those that survive the first month surviving for years? And have you had any return problems with new failed drives, because you re-partitioned it, or 'ran Linux,' or used stress-test apps?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ask Slashdot: Do You Test Your New Hard Drives?

Comments Filter:
  • Heh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Deekin_Scalesinger ( 755062 ) on Sunday December 23, 2012 @01:23PM (#42375759)
    Like, never. Out of the box and away she goes...good luck to thee!
  • Re:SSDs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Sunday December 23, 2012 @01:29PM (#42375799) Journal

    > Who cares about HDDs anymore these days?

    Anyone with a need for a massive amount of storage space.

  • Re:SSDs (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 23, 2012 @01:37PM (#42375865)

    The massive storage requirements cause massive backup time, making a RAID setup of some kind necessary. At which point a dying disk now and then no longer is an issue.

  • Re:SSDs (Score:4, Insightful)

    by White Flame ( 1074973 ) on Sunday December 23, 2012 @01:53PM (#42375947)

    Not really. People usually don't modify gigantic footprints of data per day, so standard incremental backup strategies are still very applicable. Most of the large data tends to be read-only over time, typically media, archives, large installation files, etc.

  • Re:Heh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JMJimmy ( 2036122 ) on Sunday December 23, 2012 @02:00PM (#42375987)

    Add to the above:

    HDD tools are useless. I recently tried a bunch of them - they all reported my HDD in perfect condition... while it was doing the click of death. HDD failed within a week.

  • Re:SSDs (Score:4, Insightful)

    by aaarrrgggh ( 9205 ) on Sunday December 23, 2012 @02:29PM (#42376127)

    Rebuild time. It takes our hardware raids about 24 hours to rebuild, and software raids about 72 hours. If the disk failure isn't detected immediately, even with RAID-6 you are pushing your luck.

    RAID is not backup.

  • Re:SSDs (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PlusFiveTroll ( 754249 ) on Sunday December 23, 2012 @02:50PM (#42376255) Homepage

    Depending on your definition of reliable and long term, people still use tapes.

  • Wrong Approach (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nuckfuts ( 690967 ) on Sunday December 23, 2012 @04:29PM (#42376841)

    I've been dealing with hardware failures for 20+ years. What I've learned is that disasters WILL happen, regardless of what preventive measures are in place. So I shifted my focus toward recoverablity. To me, the important question is "When something catastrophic happens, how quickly and easily can I put things back in working order"?

    Since I use RAID where appropriate, and more importantly, I am positively fanatic about frequent, full, and tested backups, the only concern I have when a hard drive dies is whether I'm still entitled to a warranty replacement.

  • Re:Heh (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 23, 2012 @08:38PM (#42378349)

    It had it's purpose in its day.

    Apostrophes are hard.

Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.

Working...