I am building a NAS in RAID 1 (Mirror) mode. Should I buy 2 of the same drive from the same manufacturer? or does it not matter so much?

all 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 46 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Quite the opposite. Use drives from as many different manufacturers as you can, especially when buying them at the same time. You want to avoid similar lifecycles and similar potential fabrication defects as much as possible, because those things increase the likelihood that they will fall close to each other - particularly with the stress of rebuilding the first one that failed.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    To the best of my knowledge, this "drives from the same batch fail at around the same time" folk wisdom has never been demonstrated in statistical studies. But, I mean, mixing drive models is certainly not going to do any harm.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    If everything went fine during production you're probably right. But there have definitely been batches of hard disks with production flaws which caused all drives from that batch to fail in a similar way.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    I know it's only what I've experienced but I've been on a 2 weeks of hell from emc drives failing at the same time because dell didn't change up serials. Had 20 raid drives all start failing within a few days of each other and all were consecutive serials.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    If I had a dollar for every time rebuilding a RAID array after one failed drive caused a second drive failure in the array in less than 24 hours.... I'd probably buy groceries for a week.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    When using drives from the same model and batch?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    I don't know if you're talking about the sample of cases you've personally witnessed, or the population of all NASes in the world. If the former, that sounds significant. If the latter, it sounds like it's probably not something to worry about.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago

    You can use different manufacturers, just make sure they are the SAME size and speed. You can also get the same ones from the same vendor, just from different online shops to try and offset getting a bad batch.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I always thought you're supposed to buy similar drives so the performance is better for some reason (I guess the same logic as when picking RAM?) but this thread is changing my mind, I guess it doesn't matter after all👀

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I heard the reverse, so they don't fail at the same time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    that's also what we did in the early 2000s when building servers. today i don't think it realy matters. i haven't had a failed drive for about 10 years and only needed to swap them out because of the capacity...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    I actually thought about that quite a bit, back in the day hard drives were made of sugar-glass. Remember the desk-star? Hrm, the death star. Do anything? It breaks. Do nothing? 15% fail rate anyways (or so I remember).

    Today I have a 3TB + 2TB (one backs up mostly the other) drives in my NAS (WD, black maybeee) and I think they are 10y plus ... I'm not using it as a real backup but I still think I should switch out one. But then again, the Synology is so old too...

    I've heard about that newer Linux file system, "M" or "L" something where you just add drives and it sorts stuff out itself, maybe I should check that out...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    You absolutely can. Of course you'll only be able to use as much capacity as the smallest disk. Sometime ago I was running a secondary mirror with one 8TB disk and 3 disks pretending to be the other 8TB disk. They were 4TB, 3TB and a 1TB - trivial with LVM. Worked without a hitch for a few years till I replaced the three gnomes in a trench coat with another 8TB disk. Obviously that's suboptimal but it works fine under certain loads.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    Gotta treat for ya:

    The three gnomes in a trench coat are the three from the left.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Hardware or software (BTFRS, ZFS etc...) RAID?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It probably doesn't matter in most cases, especially software RAID. I've had proprietary storage system vendors recommending being very careful about identical disks but that could just be salesman crap.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    ^this. but I'll go even further, do you @mypasswordis1234@lemmy.world really need RAID? How much date are you planning to write every day?

    In some case, like a typical home users with a few writes per day or even week simply having a second disk that is updated every day with rsync may be a better choice. Consider that if you're two mechanical disks spinning 24h7 they'll most likely fail at the same time (or during a RAID rebuild) and you'll end up loosing all your data. Simply having one active disk (shared on the network and spinning) and the other spun down and only turned on once a day with a cron rsync job mean your second disk will last a LOT longer and you'll be safer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Right up until that job to turn the other drive and run the backup stops and then you don’t realize it until 17 months later.

    Either way, RAID ain’t a backup, but it makes losing a drive easier.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    As long as they're mostly the same. For example on many controllers no mixing SSDs with HDDs.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    If you haven't looked into it, and if you already have the disks of varying capacity, check out JBOD. You will have to configure a system for backups however as you wont have parity like raid1

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    I'm aware, but raid 1 is mirroring which is redundancy, a jbod offers no redundancy so a backup would be even more crucial to protecting from data loss. Also i never said raid is a backup.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    JBOD via mergerfs and snapraid on top for parity is a possible solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I usually find the cheapest drives and buy multiple of those, but you should be able to assemble a RAID out of different disks, though you'll be limited to the space of the smallest one in the mirror set.

    Also make sure that your RAID systems supports this.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Okay. Where do you buy the disks?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [B] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

    Fewer Letters More Letters
    NAS Network-Attached Storage
    RAID Redundant Array of Independent Disks for mass storage
    SSD Solid State Drive mass storage

    3 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 15 acronyms.

    [Thread #328 for this sub, first seen 2nd Dec 2023, 20:35] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    I would strongly recommend that you get the same drive. It doesn't make any sense not too

  • source
  • [+] [B] 0 points 2 years ago