NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
RN316 - confirm mixing disk sizes
Hello -
I have had one of the six 6TB WD60EFRX fail in a RN316 and need to order a replacement ASAP. I'd like to confirm that I can replace that one drive with the newer 10TB WD100EFRX. The RN316 is running 6.10.3 and X-RAID2. I understand that it will not see any storage capacity increase until all drives are upgraded, but it's at least one small step in the upgrade direction.
I searched the forum and from what I gather, I believe this will work, but a confirmation will boost confidence, thanks!
- Ralph in Colorado (not an IT guy)
reburns wrote:
Base upon that, the "Red Pro NAS" 7200rpm 7200rpm 14TB - WD141KFGX might run amongst the coolest? At $20 more per HDD than the 5400 "Red NAS".
So it's between the "Red Pro NAS" 7200rpm 14TB and the "Red NAS" 5400rpm 14TB. Not worried about the cost delta. Got a suggestion?
Definitely go with the datasheet on the power use. Both drives are good choices - the Pro should perform a bit better, and has a longer warranty. So it's fine to go with that.
reburns wrote:
I could add that I can access the RN316 data, but not it's network admin RAIDar page. The front display reads "Recover data 66.64%", and I know the problem is disk #1 from a previous look at the logs (and the blinking bay light).
Normally you should be able to access the web ui, though it does run at a low priority, so it can time out.
Do you have a backup of the data?
8 Replies
Replies have been turned off for this discussion
Along the same lines, there's larger WD HDD's that are not on the ReadyNAS compatability list for RN316. Might I go with one of these larger ones? (at reasonable risk...)
WD Gold Enterprise:
12TB - WD121KRYZ14TB - WD141KRYZWD Red Pro:12TB - WD121KFBX14TB - WD141KFGXWD Red NAS:12TB - WD120EFAX14TB - WD140EFFXAll these disks will work. You could also use the equivalent Seagate disks. You will get a warning with the 7200 rpm models, basically telling you that the performance will be limited by the slower disks. Based on my own experience, that can be ignored. 7200 RPM drives will use more power (and therefore run at higher temps). I've chosen to stick with the 5400 class myself.
Note that many larger disks don't have the side mount holes (because they want to maximize room for the platters). So with some of these models you will need to remove the plastic inserts, and use the screws that came with your NAS to attach them to the tray bottom. The holes in your tray bottoms won't all align, but even one pair of screws is enough to hold the disks securely. If you've lost those screws, you can purchase them from third parties - let us know if you need a link.
FWIW, I had a mix of WD60EFRX and WD100EFAX in my RN526x for a while, and had no issues. The WD100EFAX does have the side mount holes. Note the newer WD101EFAX is air-filled - it will use more power than the older WD100EFAX, and from what I've read is a bit noisier.
Personally I'd get a pair of disks up front, and take some advantage of the increased space. Bigger disks are generally more cost effective when expanding vertically (at least over the long haul). Though you do need to factor in how much you are prepared to spend now.
In your case, just getting a 6 TB replacement would cost about $166 US (Seagate ST6000VN0033). Avoid the WD60EFAX by the way - it is an SMR drive. Anyway, $166 is about the minimum you need to spend.
- Two WD80EFAX would cost $426 (current USA amazon pricing), and gain you 2 TB of space - $130 per TB gained over simply replacing the 6 TB drive. The formula is (426-166)/2. Each 8 TB upgrade after that costs $107/TB.
- Two WD100EFAX would cost $526 and gain you 4 TB of space which is $90 per TB gained - (526-166)/4. Each upgrade after that costs $66/TB
- Two WD120EFAX would cost $700 and gain you 6 TB of space - about $89 per TB gained. Each upgrade after that costs $60/TB.
- Two WD140EFAX would cost $917 and gain you 8 TB of space - about $93 per TB gained. Each upgrade after that costs $57/TB
Based on this, upgrading to 8 TB isn't that cost effective. All sizes over 10 TB are about the same as far as cost effectiveness goes. If you don't need a lot more space right away, then maybe go with 10 TB (since it is the least expensive up front).
About a year ago I went through this analysis when I needed to replace two WD60EFRX - and went with the 10 TB option based on the pricing at the time.
Thanks for the thorough reply!
I prefer to spend the $$ upfront to upgrade for more storage, so will go with 14Tb based upon your reply, and stick with WD for now. And IF the 5400rpm generates less heat, then I see the sense in that. But that "if" might not hold?
"Red NAS" 5400rpm 14TB - WD140EFFX = up to 210 MB/s, 6.5W read/write, 3W idle, 0.8W sleep (datasheet)
"Red Pro NAS" 7200rpm 14TB - WD141KFGX = up to 255 MB/s, 6.2W read/write, 3W idle, 0.8W sleep (datasheet)
"Gold Enterprise" 7200rpm 14TB is 6W read/write, but 5.5W idle, 0.4W sleep so that's a big jump with idle (datasheet)
My old WD60EFRX 5400rpm are 5.3W read/write, 3.4W idle, 0.8W sleep (datasheet)
Base upon that, the "Red Pro NAS" 7200rpm 7200rpm 14TB - WD141KFGX might run amongst the coolest? At $20 more per HDD than the 5400 "Red NAS".
So it's between the "Red Pro NAS" 7200rpm 14TB and the "Red NAS" 5400rpm 14TB. Not worried about the cost delta. Got a suggestion?
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
