danioj

An interesting review of these drives from an Amazon customer of these drives. With pics and stats. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/review/B00QX0ZGO6/RNCS7U6K0383B/ref=mw_dp_cr?cursor=1&sort=rd

For those in Australia: ETA, 13/03/15 http://cplonline.com.au/index.php/seagete-archive-hdd-8tb-5900rpm-sata-6gb-s-3-5-128mb-st8000as0002.html http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/Hard_Drives_&_SSDs/HDD_-_3.5%22_Drives/58205-ST8000AS0002 At the moment AUD $399

Thanks for the Clarity! Excellent response, as always! Sometimes I feel like I'm back at School when you guys get going on this forum!! If they happen to read this thread can we get some input from someone who knows how Unraid does a drive rebuild!? Gurus? LT Staff?

This is an excellent thread! Gary, why would writing zeros to the disk be any different to writing anything else to the disk? E.g the timings we have seen so far are assumed because pre_clear is writing zeros!??

Seems 2GB should be enough but they recommend 4GB. Not sure if you have Plex transcoding or anything on your server but that could increase demands beyond that which is recommended for a stock Unraid Server. http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php/Designing_an_unRAID_server#Memory Also, once I got confused about the memory display in Unraid (always 98%) until I was advised of nix memory utilisation. Example of the sort of reply I got is below. http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=19339.0 If the above is not the issue then In addition I also found this link re Plex memory usage you might find helpful http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=30583.0 Interestingly when I was doing some research on FreeNas I read that they recommend having 16GB RAM (I know WTF!!!) when using PMS on their system!! I don't use it but it might indicate that it is a Memory hungry beast of a thing!! https://forums.freenas.org/index.php?threads/hardware-for-running-freenas-plex-media-server.23777/ Good Luck! EDIT: Just saw the "Seperate Computer" comment for PMS. So in addition of you're running out of memory I'd ask what other Plugins you are using! As an isolation test, maybe disable them all and see if you have the issue and enable one at a time and see which one you are taking the hit on!

I like the idea of an incremental back up (or Mirror) of my main Media Server. I guess I could from weekly Rsync without deletes and cron with deletes once every 6months. I'm liking the idea of Rsync at the moment!!!

@Leifgg - does Rsync verify the copied file in anyway against the source?

What version do you use, Free, SE or Pro?

Thanks for the reply Gary. I don't have an always on PC but I guess I could run a very lightweight Windows 8 VM just for doing this. Hmmmm. I really like the Wake Up Packets idea though!!

Hi All, I am planning my backup strategy for my new backup server will be ready shortly. My scenario is: Main: Unraid Server v5.04 with 12TB of Data (Parity Protected) over 5 3 TB disks. Backup: Unraid Server (will install latest beta) with 16TB of free space over 2 8TB disks (Not initially Parity Protected due to type of disk I am using and dont want it randomly writing Parity as I copy - but I will do this when I've done the initial copy and verified that data on both arrays is the same). What I would like: A back-up Utility or script that would mirror data to the backup server and ensure integrity (e.g. CRC or Hash Check). As an option: Something that is resume-able would be nice in case of network error or interruption. I've considered CrashPlan or Rsync but cant find an absolute step by step guide. This is not my area! :-( Can someone point me to a guide or product or suggest something to help me please? EDIT: I'd also like to run all this from the Unraid OS without the need for another PC, OS or VM etc. Daniel

I like going to bed an waking up to this stuff! Based on what I'm reading I think I'm convinced that if I tried to fill two of these bad boys in one queued job to back up (Archive) my exisiting 12TB Array then I'd see slower speeds. In the future however when backups are more progressive (ie weekly changes) then not. Question is - do I care? Don't think I care about the possibility of slow performance weekly as the Arrays are sync'd but I'm not sure I like the idea of waiting weeks while the 12TB Array is backed up initially!!

So, in my case where I am transferring 12TB at once - what do you think? Transfer to an array (containing these drives) not protected by Parity initially then once everything is backed up the first time add a Parity drive and calculate Parity? Would that help do you think? Following the initial backup I cant imagine Ill be transferring more than 25GB per week to the backup.

@garycase so, would you expect to see a slow down if you queued 12TB of data to transfer to an Unraid Array comprising 2 of those drives in one go?

Jeez man you are so combative it is becoming irritating. You are one person who has done one set of tests and produced results (albeit seemingly positive ones). The results look positive and I thank you for doing them and sharing. However I was referring to the this type of drives suitability long term as a Parity drive which I don't think is conclusive (how can it be with just one set of tests as evidence and no one who has this sort of drive for any considerable time). That statement wasn't a dig at you or the effort you have put in - it was a reference to a risk I still consider I will be taking. Or do you believe that you have now conclusively proved with certainty and without risk that they are suitable in an application as a Parity drive in an Unraid environment - No more data required or discussion on the subject jtown has provided, all is well!! [yes, sigh]

I'm pretty happy now. I can order from Amazon with only $15 shipping to Australia! Hoping to use them for my Back-up Server Project. Operational Day to Day Media Server will remain Full of Red's. I'm now trying to decide if I want to buy 3 and use one for Parity (without the evidence to support it will be OK) or just use 3 and don't use Parity as it is Backup. Don't really want to shell out on a faster 8TB (e.g. HGST) drive for Parity! Figure its going to be cold most of the time as it is only backup and I intend to run it once a week - but still!

Jono just relplied to my earlier thread addressing up and coming changes relating to schedule information. On that basis id certainly donate to an extra redundancy initiative. As I said before, I think the company should consider a seperately funded "Project" to do this. Highlight the funds required and request donations. Perhaps even donation Milestones- e.g Milestone for exisiting team, Milestone where 1 person contracted in to help Milestone 3 where 2 people etc The more donated and earned then that's the project that is initiated. Some safety net for investors / donators too. If at least milestone 1 is not reached all get refunded (Maybe minus 1% for costs). Just thinking out loud! EDIT: Just had a look at GoFundMe that Weebo suggested. No restrictions for commercial entities running fund raising initiatives. Flat 5% fee. No withdrawal fees. I'd be interested to see in what currency it is run or if it is selectable or pre agreed exchange rates etc etc I'd also consider withdrawing regularly as it is no fee. Could be viable. You could also ask via these forums for donators to add the 5% and post those donations on the forum too!

-1 I am not sure if I would pay extra but if there was a target amount of money for the project (i.e. need 5k to develop and accept donations towards that end) and if goal reached then development would begin or monies refunded I would donate (subject to having a commitment to when it would be delivered). I paid for the Pro version up front and I don't think it is a good precedent to accept that you will pay for new features when you already have the top licensed version! But thats just me. My issue with Unraid (as I refer to above) at the moment is not the software - it is the management of the releases. For I find it hard to know when things are going to happen. There is a lack of communication / commitment on release schedules etc. This might make me pause on donation too. Whats the point of paying for something (or donating) when you have no idea when it is going to happen. Especially if it is going to be a long time (e.g. > Year) - you might not need it then!? http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?board=63.0 As a Project Manager myself for many years - the very minimum (even in Initiation pre Planning when the scope and schedule is not fully developed)is high level milestones and dates. Unless there is some information buried in the forum that I cannot find - there is nothing!?

We will be making some changes to the roadmap soon along with some other announcements. Stay tuned... Hi, its been a couple of months now and still not seeing the project milestones or target dates. Alternativley is there a target release schedule we can see (i.e. beta every month, number of betas per release, RC's etc etc)?

Going back to the original post title, man am I irritated! USD $260 Retail Announcement. I imagine they were at this price because of the nature of the drive, technology expected use etc. So what happens ..... They are starting on Amazon for USD $329 And here in Australia they are AUD $399 I find this ridiculous. When I talk to my supplier (Good on you Scorptec) I get told "Well, it is an 8TB drive so you expect it to cost more than a 6TB drive". Pointless conversations about technology etc as I can actually hear him turning off - all the suppliers seem to be seeing is 8TB > 6TB so cost should be higher and people will pay it. Spoke to Seagate rep - RRP is still USD $260. I ask, will Seagate sell this direct - answer, don't know. Lets squeeze everyone for everything cent we can. Annoying!!!! Sigh.

What is the warranty on the external drive? Will Seagate honor 3 yr warranty on the drive inside it?

Gum flapping for me .... I'm going to try one when I can get one for array drives in my Backup server. Going to keep WD Red's in Production. At the moment though here (In Australia) they are no-where to be found! I've seen them on State Side sides Amazon and bhphotovideo but both for pre order. Over there the price seems similar be as advertised in the initial press release which is good. Over here there is only one site Techbuy which has them for pre-order but the price is so much higher 420AUD (~350USD). Wont be buying from them - I think the price is inflated as they seem to be the first to be selling them over here. What I have found interesting is that Seagate are not selling them on their web site yet. Plus - the warranty at each site that "has" them so far seems to be listed as 1 year with re-seller. Makes me pause.

Ahhh, thank you. I misunderstood the wiki. It is only my cache drive so I've not been overly worried as the mover eventually succeeded in moving the files it needed to (and I've been limiting use somewhat) - but it is out of warranty so I'll backup the apps folders to my array and pre-clear the sucker at at the weekend. Will update once I'm done. Thanks again!

Thanks for the reply. I don't understand though. Based on my interpretation of the SMART report, there are no pending sectors? I refer to this from the Wiki .... VALUE is almost always used as a normalized scale of perfectly good to perfectly bad, usually starting at VALUE=100, then dropping toward a worst case of VALUE=1. You can generally think of it as representing a scale starting at 100% good, then slowly dropping until failure at some predetermined percentage number, in the THRESHOLD column. Someone realized that if the values only run from 100 to 1, then they are wasting the possible values from 101 to 252, so some SMART programmers have decided to stretch the scale for certain attributes to start at 200 instead of 100, providing twice the data points. Unfortunately, which attributes are scaled from 200 to 1 is completely inconsistent, with almost all SMART reports showing some attributes starting at 100, and other attributes starting at 200. In addition, there are a few Maxtor and Samsung drives that took the start of the scale all the way to 252 or 253! Above, you see all but 1 attribute using 100, the exception being attribute 199 which starts at 200. In general, you can think of 200-type scales as 100 times 2 (just divide the number by 2), and from now on, that is what we are going to do in most of the discussion. So ..... on the basis that most of my attributes are at 100 (including pending sectors) doesn't that mean that is ok?

Hmmm - I must be wrong!!!

OK. While I am dying here I decided to read about SMART reports and realised I had been ignorant about what they actually meant. Read this: http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php/Understanding_SMART_Reports Firstly I think I understand now why the SMART STATUS is showing as OK. Thats because according to the SMART report the overall STATUS is OK. I didn't realise also that only 3 variables contributed to that status (e.g. those that are marked pre_fail are critical) Raw_Read_Error_Rate, Spin_Up_Time and Reallocated_Secont_Ct. So if I am reading this right: Of the critical attributes: I have started to have more Raw Read Errors. No Reallocated Sectors and Spin Up Time is fine also. Of the none critical attributes: Clearly it has been powered on for a good number of hours (not surprising as it was a drive I used to have in my old ReadyNAS NV+) but all others seem ok. So what I am thinking here is, yes there was some read errors - but thats ok it happens. But I should keep an eye on the drive - specifically around the Raw Read Errors - but I shouldn't feel the need to replace it straight away. Is this stab at it right?