Buying Hard Drives from the same "Batch" - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-18-2012, 07:10 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcturkey View Post

I suspect it's more than a handful of people here who would be buying a larger number of drives, but again, the point is that just because it's not applicable or relevant for everyone does not mean you should automatically dismiss it as not being valid. If that were a fair or logical way of approaching things, then damn near everything stated on this forum is irrelevant, because it does not apply to everyone. Even in the Echo extender thread, many folks have different desires and expectations for what it will do. Should we exclude those who are not interested in specific aspects of it simply because they are not a majority? It's fine to have opinions and perspectives, but it becomes a problem when we start dismissing the opinions, perspectives, and experiences of others, just because they may not be the most relevant to a certain segment of the forum population. You have put a tremendous amount of time and energy into your guides, and I respect that. I have no use for them personally, but I recognize that there is a large segment of the AVS crowd that actually benefits greatly from them. That's part of what makes forums like this work so well - a variety of opinions and backgrounds. I've pretty clearly stated that what applies to someone buying a few drives does not apply to someone buying fifteen, or twenty, or a thousand, and I think it's important to recognize the difference there.

That's basically the same thing I said. I never said that it didn't apply to ANYONE, did I? Its just that even the people from that google link (the google search I posted) don't even qualify for this argument.

In the end that's my point I guess. What MAY be relevant to only a select few people often gets spread as gospel to the "mass majority" even though it doesn't apply. That's all over the place with PC and especially HTPC. There are some things that just get perpetuated for absolutely no reason across ALL situations.

We will have to agree to disagree that there are more than a handful of people who are buying 10-20+ drives at once though. I know they are out there but I still think they will add them as needed and as their collection expands which makes this whole argument moot.
assassin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-19-2012, 06:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,247
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 1019
The same logic could be applied in opposite.

If you purchase all your drives in one batch you could get a good batch and have good luck with all of them.

You can minimize your chances if getting a bad batch by not sampling multiple batches since most batches are very good you have high odds this would work to your benefit.


Personally I don't believe in either idea but just a thought.

I think all these kinds of arguments are just about people being afraid.

People are always afraid of uncertainty so they will act in ways that help them accept it or make them feel better about things they really can't control

You should never live your life in fear.

There is no reason to be afraid.

If you can't control sonething don't pretend to.

Dont let fear make your decisions.

I same issue people buying certain products over perceived reliability that's just a wild guess or a "feeling".

You really have no control. Too many variables to even attempt to predict accurately.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-19-2012, 07:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 178 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

That's basically the same thing I said. I never said that it didn't apply to ANYONE, did I?

No, you asked it the argument was valid, not if average people should worry about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

The same logic could be applied in opposite.
If you purchase all your drives in one batch you could get a good batch and have good luck with all of them.
You can minimize your chances if getting a bad batch by not sampling multiple batches since most batches are very good you have high odds this would work to your benefit.

But you're missing the point, in a redundant array, the loss of a single drive is "no big deal" the array and data are designed to survive that, however loss of more than one drive (or more than your number of parity drives) is catastrophic.

Lets use some completely contrived numbers. Lets say you need ten hard drives and there are ten available batches, 9 of them have 0% chance of failing while one of the batches has a 100% chance of failing.

If you buy one drive from every batch, you have a 100% chance of getting a bad drive, but the array is designed to survive that so since the remaining drives have a 0% chance of failure, your data is 100% guaranteed to be safe, despite getting a failed drive for sure.

If you buy all ten drives from the same batch (chosen at random) you have a 1 in 10 chance of getting drives from the bad batch, a 10% chance. Since the array can't survive more than one drive failing and you have a 10% chance of getting more than one bad drive, you have a 10% chance of losing all your data.

So while buying all from one batch gives you a 10% chance of getting a bad drive (actually multiple bad drives) vs buying from each, which gives you a 100% chance of getting a bad drive, which does sound better, 10% chance of a bad drive seems better odds than 100% you have to consider the use in an array.

Reality is your choice is a 0% chance of losing data by buying from diverse batches vs 10% chance of data loss by buying from a single batch.

This is the argument, and this is why the argument is valid, and not hogwash.

Now reality is the odds are more like 1% or whatever, and the differences may be like 1% for a good batch and 1.01% for a bad batch, and the odds of two drives failing at the same time are like 1% * 1% so, what like 0.01% or something.
Quote:
I think all these kinds of arguments are just about people being afraid.
People are always afraid of uncertainty so they will act in ways that help them accept it or make them feel better about things they really can't control

Fear is a good thing, it makes you stop and think. People should be afraid of data loss, and should think about it. If you're not afraid of data loss then you've got no reason to back up important data, which is a really bad idea. People should fear data loss and think about it, and decide what data is important and how they want to protect it.

Like I said before, I don't think buying in separate batches is really worth the trouble, but if someone wants to do it, I say go for it. There's solid logic behind the idea and there's nothing wrong with doing it, it's just a little more effort up front.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
Old 07-19-2012, 08:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
damelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

No, you asked it the argument was valid, not if average people should worry about it.

Please don't start this to be an argument over grammar now... come on..
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

If you buy one drive from every batch, you have a 100% chance of getting a bad drive, but the array is designed to survive that so since the remaining drives have a 0% chance of failure, your data is 100% guaranteed to be safe, despite getting a failed drive for sure.
...
Reality is your choice is a 0% chance of losing data by buying from diverse batches vs 10% chance of data loss by buying from a single batch.
This is the argument, and this is why the argument is valid, and not hogwash.

So first you argue about the "literal grammatical" wording he is using, and then go straight to "reality is 0%", which is a complete falsehood. wink.gif hehe. Now I'm just messing with you, since you did say exactly what I was thinking next...
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

Now reality is the odds are more like 1% or whatever, and the differences may be like 1% for a good batch and 1.01% for a bad batch, and the odds of two drives failing at the same time are like 1% * 1% so, what like 0.01% or something.

Alternate Realities!!! It's like Fringe!
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

Fear is a good thing, it makes you stop and think. People should be afraid of data loss, and should think about it. If you're not afraid of data loss then you've got no reason to back up important data, which is a really bad idea. People should fear data loss and think about it, and decide what data is important and how they want to protect it.
Like I said before, I don't think buying in separate batches is really worth the trouble, but if someone wants to do it, I say go for it. There's solid logic behind the idea and there's nothing wrong with doing it, it's just a little more effort up front.

The fear of data loss is a good thing, absolutely. But focusing that fear on ordering a batch of 6-12 hard drives isn't where people should be spending their time. Redundant arrays are in no way meant to serve as a data backup, but a lot of people use them for that. If someone's time or data is important enough to them that they cannot lose it, or that 2+ hard drives going bad will ruin them, then they actually should back up their data. With things like Blu Rays, that is pretty complicated due to the size of a single file, but it doesn't change the fact. I lost an external hdd where I used to "back up" my pictures from college on, but I also backed up all of my files to DVD-Rs. My external HDD died, and since I had started using it, I had replaced my laptop, so I had no "active" copies of those files anymore.. But I did have a binder full of backups which I could restore them. Physical media backup is a very time consuming and annoying process. Most people will never spend the time or money to do a complete offline backup of their data.

We all use redundant arrays in our HTPCs so that we can get that extra protection for a blip along the way, but then a lot of people end up scoffing when it comes to the cost of one extra hard drive to do an extra level of protection. Do you know how many people just use a plain old RAID-5 because it is most cost effective? Just going to RAID-6 gives you one extra drive failure. Or even a RAID 5 with a hot backup. Now tell me, really, what the odds are that anyone here has 3 drive failures, and all at the exact same time? This is just for a media backup! I have been working in IT for 12 years, and to this day the only time I lost a single array (At work, or at home) had nothing to do with the hard drives, it had to do with a raid card dying. I could have replaced it, but it was old, and I had my physical backup. So I decided against replacing it. I've had hard drives go bad, but all you need to do is pop in a new drive when it happens. If you don't notice it for a month and you get another drive failure... well.. that's just your own damn fault.

In the end, paranoia is unique to each individual. I don't think anything anyone says here is going to convince anyone else to be any more or less paranoid than they already are. So the discussion is kind of silly, because no one is going to understand why someone doesn't think like them. wink.gif If I see some sale on the HDD I want at newegg or whatever, I'm going to buy every one I can. Plus expanding my array is a PITA and I don't want to do it
damelon is online now  
Old 07-19-2012, 08:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,247
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 1019
Just me but my data loss protection comes from duplicity and cloud storage.

Counting on a drive makes no sense.

But having a self healing flexraid array on my server and important stuff duplicated on an external USB with the most important stuff on Cloud backup seems to work flawless for me.

It's not hard. It's not expensive.

I can suffer even a multi drive failure with no data loss.

Your plan is more important than your products.

You can't control a drive reliability so why try. Just hope for the best and plan for the worst.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-19-2012, 08:39 AM
Advanced Member
 
Taperwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bremerton, WA
Posts: 912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
One could also be like me who bought four IBM GXP drives around 2001 and had all four die, including two simultaneously in a mirror RAID. We survived, but it was a wakeup call for me. I bought the drives based on IBM's stellar reputation in HD's and did not research these specific drives. By that time, however, the anecdotal evidence was already building that there were serious problems with these drives. Eventually, these drives put IBM out of the HD business.

Although Stranger89 gives a very good strategy if anyone is worried about bad batches, my strategy is to never buy a drive that has not already been on the market for at least a year and preferably two years. If I find nothing to indicate the failure rate is no worse than industry standards, I would feel comfortable buying it.
Taperwood is offline  
Old 07-19-2012, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
damelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Just me but my data loss protection comes from duplicity and cloud storage.
Counting on a drive makes no sense.
But having a self healing flexraid array on my server and important stuff duplicated on an external USB with the most important stuff on Cloud backup seems to work flawless for me.
It's not hard. It's not expensive.
I can suffer even a multi drive failure with no data loss.
Your plan is more important than your products.
You can't control a drive reliability so why try. Just hope for the best and plan for the worst.

Yeah exactly. I do cloud backup for my important files (Documents, pictures, etc) which is safest. I have a second offline storage for other stuff. Backup for 20TB data is expensive though, the little stuff is no problem.
damelon is online now  
 
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off