I'm using my Unraid right now for just basic storage (Docs, Photos, DVDs).  When I start doing Bluray, I'll probably just put those data files on a faster drive in the array that I would get (not a green drive).  For what I am doing, the speed is just fine right now.

I'm using my Unraid right now for just basic storage (Docs, Photos, DVDs).  When I start doing Bluray, I'll probably just put those data files on a faster drive in the array that I would get (not a green drive).  For what I am doing, the speed is just fine right now.

 

You won't find a drive that can't do 7MB/sec. My server has 18 drives, a mixture of Green and other drives. All 18 drives contain Blu-ray rips (1:1) and they all work fine.

I stumbled upon an interesting document supposedly from Western Digital detailing the road-map for their drive line:

 

http://multi.gnt.lt/Pages/brochures/Western%20Digital/Advanced%20Format%204K%20Nov2009.pdf

 

Basically, it states the 2TB drives are the last of the EADS line and the EARS line is the replacement.  Interestingly enough, they outline 2.5TB drives as being out in 1st quarter, 3TB drives in 2nd quarter and 4TB drives in 4th quarter of this year!  I'm not overly optimistic, but I would love to see 4TB drives by the end of the year!

 

If some of you are still experiencing bad performance with your WD EARS drive, the advanced format EARS drives do not seem to align properly under unRAID.  You have to jumper pins 7-8 on the drive before partitioning in unRAID to avoid significant performance hits from misalignment.  

 

Be warned that if you change the jumper after you have already placed data on the drive, it will be corrupted becase the address mapping will be offset by one sector by the drive itself.

 

See before and after performance comparison here:

 

http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=5076.msg49831#msg49831

I replaced my 2 clicking Seagate 1.5TB drives that I just bought 1.5 months ago to build my unraid (1 for parity and 1 for data) with 2 WD 1.5TB EARS and so far no problems.  I've been running 1 as the parity for about a week now and then just swapped out the data drive with the 2nd drive.  Everything rebuilt and parity check is ok.  Everything seems fine so far on my end.  It's much better not hearing any clicking every minute between both of the Seagates that I had, not to mention all the pauses I used to get during read and writes.

 

So those Seagates are no good?  Fry's has them on sale for $99 this week and I was planning on picking up 4

So those Seagates are no good?  Fry's has them on sale for $99 this week and I was planning on picking up 4

 

I've been running a pair of the Seagate ST31500341AS since they came out without incident.  There were a number of issues reported with early firmware releases, but that should not be a factor for drives purchased now (I upgraded my firmware because mine were early production samples).

 

These particular Seagates are actually fast drives, putting in about 98-100MB/s average read and write throughput.  The WD EARS series is only around 85MB/s.

 

I'm not sure what to think right now in regard to hard drive reliability - all of the manufacturers seem to be putting out a lot of DOA drives in these large capacity formats.  I buy quite a few and I have not had a bad drive from any of the suppliers recently.  If you believe the reviews, Samsung seems to be on top in this category.

 

 

I replaced my 2 clicking Seagate 1.5TB drives that I just bought 1.5 months ago to build my unraid (1 for parity and 1 for data) with 2 WD 1.5TB EARS and so far no problems.  I've been running 1 as the parity for about a week now and then just swapped out the data drive with the 2nd drive.  Everything rebuilt and parity check is ok.  Everything seems fine so far on my end.  It's much better not hearing any clicking every minute between both of the Seagates that I had, not to mention all the pauses I used to get during read and writes.

 

So those Seagates are no good?  Fry's has them on sale for $99 this week and I was planning on picking up 4

 

I wouldn't get them again.  I don't trust them.

Many users are reporting a huge performance loss over EADS.

 

Who and where...... without a cite, it is just hearsay.

I'm afraid it's not "hearsay". http://www.osnews.com/story/22872/Linux_Not_Fully_Prepared_for_4096-Byte_Sector_Hard_Drives

 

Good article on 4k sectors: http://lwn.net/Articles/322777/

 

Latest info on 4K: http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Kernel-Log-Linux-and-hard-disks-with-4-KByte-sectors-939523.html

 

More info (with solutions) from Western Digital Community website: http://community.wdc.com/t5/Desktop/Problem-with-WD-Advanced-Format-drive-in-LINUX-WD15EARS/td-p/6395

 

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Kernel-Log-Linux-and-hard-disks-with-4-KByte-sectors-939523.html

I haven't tested it, but I understand that gparted 0.6.0 accomodates the 'Advanced Format' drives, and resolves the performance issue.

I haven't tested it, but I understand that gparted 0.6.0 accomodates the 'Advanced Format' drives, and resolves the performance issue.

 

That won't help with unRAID, since unRAID expects the partition to start on sector 63.

I haven't tested it, but I understand that gparted 0.6.0 accomodates the 'Advanced Format' drives, and resolves the performance issue.

 

That won't help with unRAID, since unRAID expects the partition to start on sector 63.

 

Ah, okay. I hadn't realised that restriction was built in!