December 2, 201015 yr I need to add support for these drives, so I'd like some input from the Community. Specifically, which drive(s) should I test with? I know I could read through pages and pages of threads for these answers, but I need a quick summary please. Obvious example is WD20EARS, but are there 4K-sector drives that do not have similar jumpering capability? Similar question: is anyone successfully using drives larger than 2TB?
December 2, 201015 yr I am not aware of any, except WD, that have the jumper to change the offset. Several people posted test results with various drive queries against the WDEARS, and we could find no reliable method to detect if the jumper is in place, or not. As far as >2TB drives go, the only one I know of on the market as a bare drive is the WD, but AFAIK it requires the mobo to be in AHCI mode.... which may be another cluster-you-know-what waiting to bite people.
December 2, 201015 yr Samsung HD204UI Samsung link Seagate ST2000DL03 (incorporates SmartAllign) Seagate also has 1.5TB and 1TB versions with Advanced Format.
December 2, 201015 yr i second this Samsung HD204UI i have a 3tb seagate external , i had taken out the internal drive and had it in my unraid server for 2 months without issue and eventually replaced it with a WD Black disk for reliability.
December 2, 201015 yr Thirding the Samsung F4. It was recently on sale as the cheapest 2 TB drive on the market ($60, I think?), so it is very tempting for all of us. It is also the only advanced format drive (to my knowledge) that doesn't have any sort of compatibility mode.
December 2, 201015 yr Similar question: is anyone successfully using drives larger than 2TB? I would think that is impossible with the current MBR partitioning scheme used by unRAID. (unless the drive reported its sectors as 4k bytes rather than 512 bytes.) Odds are nobody has tried at all. What would be nice is for you to support the 3TB drive controller supplied with the 3TB drive as a first step towards supporting them. I suspect the marketplace will be insane as each manufacturer puts their own band-aid/bailing-wire fixes into place for the 3TB drives. Basically very little current hardware will work... It is currently cheaper to purchase two 2TB drives than a single 3TB drive, so it makes little economic sense to go 3TB unless you are out of drive slots.
December 2, 201015 yr It is also the only advanced format drive (to my knowledge) that doesn't have any sort of compatibility mode. See the new Seagate drives in my previous post.
December 2, 201015 yr Is it not possible to have two versions of unRaid, one for <=2TB and one for >2TB. Would this not be easier to manage.
December 2, 201015 yr Is it not possible to have two versions of unRaid, one for <=2TB and one for >2TB. Would this not be easier to manage. no
December 2, 201015 yr If I understand correctly, a 4k drive is okay in (recent?) Linux, provided that it is truthful and reports that it has 4k sector size. The WD Advanced Format drives have 4kB sectors but falsely report a 512B size. Can someone with an F4 confirm what sector size it reports?
December 3, 201015 yr They all lie. All 4K Sector Drives currently report as 512-byte Sectors. This is done for compatibility.
December 3, 201015 yr Samsung HD204UI (x3 here) [Purchased 3 at $59.99/ea. Discovered an hour later ..they aren't recommended for UnRaid, but figured for that price, I'd use 'em in something, so I didn't cancel the order. Having nothing to lose, I have one in my array right now- 60% full (Nothing irreplaceable). [update] After seeing some of the responses, felt I should clarify- I USED the F4 in my UnRaid array and don't have a problem with it. It even runs a couple degrees cooler than the WD drive. Works fine....I don't live by speed benchmarks, and I'm not streaming HD to multiple outputs, so I'm more than happy with the F4....AND they don't seem to have the same community 'doubt' that the Seagate drives have fostered of-late.
December 3, 201015 yr Samsung HD204UI (x3 here) [Purchased 3 at $59.99/ea. Discovered an hour later ..they aren't recommended for UnRaid, but figured for that price, I'd use 'em in something, so I didn't cancel the order. Having nothing to lose, I have one in my array right now- 60% full (Nothing irreplaceable). Similar story here. I got one on sale, only to find out it won't work in Unraid. I thought I'd use it for something, but it'sjust sitting there, waiting for unRAID to support it.
December 3, 201015 yr They all lie. All 4K Sector Drives currently report as 512-byte Sectors. This is done for compatibility. Compatibility with? Just because Micros**t produce c**p software and dictate the rules?
December 3, 201015 yr Re: Samsung F204: Similar story here. I got one on sale, only to find out it won't work in Unraid. I thought I'd use it for something, but it's just sitting there, waiting for unRAID to support it. I didn't think it won't work? Isn't it just that, in some circumstances, the performance will be less than ideal? What happens if you let unRAID format the drive, then use parted to move the partition onto a 4kB boundary?
December 3, 201015 yr They all lie. All 4K Sector Drives currently report as 512-byte Sectors. This is done for compatibility. Compatibility with? Just because Micros**t produce c**p software and dictate the rules? Compatability with all current motherboard BIOS and all software that deals with harddrives. This includes Linux OS and hundreds of open-sourced GPL software too! Please check your blind hatred towards one of the largest software development firms at the door as your ignorant notions serve no benefit to the unRAID community.
December 3, 201015 yr Samsung HD204UI: cheapest 2TB out there. I'm waiting for an upgrade of unRAID that supports these to build my system. Thx!
December 3, 201015 yr Samsung HD204UI Samsung link Seagate ST2000DL03 (incorporates SmartAllign) Seagate also has 1.5TB and 1TB versions with Advanced Format. I will reiterate that all manufacturer's will only deliver drives after Jan. 1 2011 with Advanced Formatting. That is why Tom is being proactive with this request, and why we should not just limit it to the Samsung. Currently the unRAID community will have no options other than the WD EARS 2TB drives once the supply of Seagate and Samsung HD203 drives dries up. While the pricing of the Seagates currently is not competitive with Samsung, that should not be a reason for exclusion. Do you think Seagate drives will remain price uncompetitive forever? While each manufacturer's implementation makes it more difficult to resolve- the commonality is that all drives will be 4K and show an interface of 512B. >2.2TB is a different issue altogether. I haven't read what Seagate is doing with SmartAlign...(hopefully that will make the transition easier for that drive), but on the surface it sounds better than WD "jumpers" solution or Samsung's "no solution". It is unclear whether Hitachi new 7K3000 drives are Advanced Format. I have sent an email to Hitachi support to clarify. Hitachi states that the interface is 512B...but that may just be the logical interface.
December 3, 201015 yr Is it not possible to have two versions of unRaid, one for <=2TB and one for >2TB. Would this not be easier to manage. No, it can be (i.e. more than likely will) be more of a pain in the arse to release 2 different versions.
December 3, 201015 yr They all lie. All 4K Sector Drives currently report as 512-byte Sectors. This is done for compatibility. Compatibility with? Just because Micros**t produce c**p software and dictate the rules? It's just not MS stuff, and it is really only Windows XP. Windows XP is 10 years old at this point and while I still use it on occasion so certain things, everyone should be updating to Windows 7. Microsoft's biggest problem and the reason HD manufacturers have to provide the "jumper" is because MS still supports XP. If MS would have just dropped support for XP, LIKE THEY SHOULD HAVE, then HD manufacturers could have made the choice to support an obsolete OS or not. I am no fan of MS products but I use them all day for my job. In some respects MS was ahead of linux with the move to support 4K sector drives. If I remember correctly Vista and Windows 7 are perfectly fine with 4K sector drives.
December 3, 201015 yr They all lie. All 4K Sector Drives currently report as 512-byte Sectors. This is done for compatibility. Compatibility with? Just because Micros**t produce c**p software and dictate the rules? It's just not MS stuff, and it is really only Windows XP. Windows XP is 10 years old at this point and while I still use it on occasion so certain things, everyone should be updating to Windows 7. Microsoft's biggest problem and the reason HD manufacturers have to provide the "jumper" is because MS still supports XP. If MS would have just dropped support for XP, LIKE THEY SHOULD HAVE, then HD manufacturers could have made the choice to support an obsolete OS or not. I am no fan of MS products but I use them all day for my job. In some respects MS was ahead of linux with the move to support 4K sector drives. If I remember correctly Vista and Windows 7 are perfectly fine with 4K sector drives. It was only two years ago that my company upgraded my PC from Windows2000 to WinXP. The last remnants of 2000 (all over the company) were removed this year. Don't think from a business perspective Microsoft CAN get rid of XP as soon as everybody (individual users) or Microsoft would want. They extended 2000 support about 5 years longer than they originally said they were going to just because of that. My company will NOT install a new OS until the first service pack has been produced and then it is a slow migration and only updated if service calls to our help desk become too frequent. And I doubt Vista will ever hit a machine here.
December 3, 201015 yr We had a productive conversation HERE concerning how the migration to 4k sectors might work. In summary, these options were debated / discussed: 1 - Offering 2 separate versions (sector 63 and sector 64 alignment) - Pros: Easy to implement; Cons: More difficult to support and maintain, confusion about what advice applies to what version 2 - Offering 4byte aligned (sector 64 alignment) version only. Users would have a time-consuming one-time conversion effort. Pros: Easy to implement; Cons: Risk of data loss while migrating, very time consuming for users 3 - Hybrid array (existing disks aligned at sector 63 and new ones at sector 64). Would require new method to replace a failed or upsize a disk: - New (replacement) disk added to array and cleared (or pre-cleared) - New disk partitioned / formatted with sector 64 alignment - Data from failed or to-be replaced disk copied at file level to new disk - Disk to be removed zeroed (or if simulated, the simulated disk is zeroed to adjust parity) and removed from array - Done! Methods to recover/restart if crash or power failure during rebuild would need to be considered during each step in process. BubbaQ explains this concept in more detail in the thread above. Pros: Easy for users to migrate, data stays protected throughout; Cons: more difficult to implement, time consuming disk replacement 4. Another option was discussed briefly - moving the partition forward one sector on a disk. A tool might be able to do this with some finese based on a knowledge of RFS and avoid the brute force method. No one was aware of a tool to do this with an RFS disk. The brute force method would be lengthy and non-restartable - a bad combination.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.