NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
Replace Disc ... SSHD
Model: ReadyNAS Duo [X-RAID] Serial: 24M3117Y01978 Firmware: RAIDiator 4.1.16 [1.00a043] Memory: 256 MB [2.5-3-3-7]
Yesterday, the NAS booted on timer as usual but the power light went solid for a few seconds and then started to slowly flash with the disc 1 light flashing. The power and disc lights then went off, and then came back again in slow flash mode. I couldn't get to Radiator to see any messages and I couldn't manually power down the device from the power button (it just recycled through the loop). I powered down by then removing the power cable, reseated the drives and rebooted with the same result. So I then tried removing a disc at a time and rebooting - and the device booted as soon as I removed drive 1. So it appears that drive 1 was dead or dying.
Anyway, the drive in the device is an old 2TB Seagate Barracuda ST2000DL003 5900 RPM - if I replace the drive can I put in a 2TB SSHD drive (Seagate ST2000DX002 FireCuda SSHD 2TB 7200rpm)? Any issues?
steveTu wrote:
Thanks - I appreciate and take on board your advice - but for future reference, can I ask what makes a drive more suitable for a NAS?
There are some drive firmware features (for instance TLER) that make a drive better suited for RAID. TLER (Time Limited Error Recovery) is generally disabled on desktop class drives. NAS purposed (and enterprise class) drives also are supposed to control vibration better, which is helpful in a larger NAS than the Duo.
Some larger drives (> 4 TB) use SMR technology, and doesn't work that well in a NAS. Sustained write speeds with SMR are quite slow, which is a problem when the array is synced. That's not an issue here though.
Generally Seagate and Western Digital don't recommend their desktop drives for RAID (other than RAID-1, which happens to be what your Duo is doing).
Note there are folks (for instance BackBlaze) who routinely use desktop-class drives in their RAID arrays anyway. Though I think that is (at least in part) a risk/cost tradeoff that they are making (using a mix of cheaper drives, and risking replacing them more often).
In this particular case, the Ironwolf is also a bit cheaper than the Barracuda. Plus the Duo isn't really able to take advantage of the faster RPM, since it's performance is limited by it's CPU. You'll also be limited by the other old disk (like another 5900 rpm drive). The large cache in the Barracuda (the SSHD) could be an advantage, though only if both drives in the array had it - and I don't think it would make much difference in practice, since the Duo is caching in it's RAM anyway.
FWIW, I use NAS-purposed drives in all my newer NAS (generally WD Reds, though I do have some IronWolf), and find they are cost-effective, quiet, reliable, power-efficient and give good performance. My own Duo has an old Seagate Barracuda (ST32000542AS) and a newer WD Red (WD20EFRX) - no need to replace the Barracuda, as it is still working well.
8 Replies
Replies have been turned off for this discussion
steveTu wrote:
Anyway, the drive in the device is an old 2TB Seagate Barracuda ST2000DL003 5900 RPM - if I replace the drive can I put in a 2TB SSHD drive (Seagate ST2000DX002 FireCuda SSHD 2TB 7200rpm)? Any issues?
Personally I'd get a NAS-purposed drive - WD Red or Seagate Ironwolf (ST2000VN004). Though the FireCuda likely will work.
Thanks - I appreciate and take on board your advice - but for future reference, can I ask what makes a drive more suitable for a NAS?
steveTu wrote:
Thanks - I appreciate and take on board your advice - but for future reference, can I ask what makes a drive more suitable for a NAS?
There are some drive firmware features (for instance TLER) that make a drive better suited for RAID. TLER (Time Limited Error Recovery) is generally disabled on desktop class drives. NAS purposed (and enterprise class) drives also are supposed to control vibration better, which is helpful in a larger NAS than the Duo.
Some larger drives (> 4 TB) use SMR technology, and doesn't work that well in a NAS. Sustained write speeds with SMR are quite slow, which is a problem when the array is synced. That's not an issue here though.
Generally Seagate and Western Digital don't recommend their desktop drives for RAID (other than RAID-1, which happens to be what your Duo is doing).
Note there are folks (for instance BackBlaze) who routinely use desktop-class drives in their RAID arrays anyway. Though I think that is (at least in part) a risk/cost tradeoff that they are making (using a mix of cheaper drives, and risking replacing them more often).
In this particular case, the Ironwolf is also a bit cheaper than the Barracuda. Plus the Duo isn't really able to take advantage of the faster RPM, since it's performance is limited by it's CPU. You'll also be limited by the other old disk (like another 5900 rpm drive). The large cache in the Barracuda (the SSHD) could be an advantage, though only if both drives in the array had it - and I don't think it would make much difference in practice, since the Duo is caching in it's RAM anyway.
FWIW, I use NAS-purposed drives in all my newer NAS (generally WD Reds, though I do have some IronWolf), and find they are cost-effective, quiet, reliable, power-efficient and give good performance. My own Duo has an old Seagate Barracuda (ST32000542AS) and a newer WD Red (WD20EFRX) - no need to replace the Barracuda, as it is still working well.
StephenB wrote:Personally I'd get a NAS-purposed drive - WD Red or Seagate Ironwolf (ST2000VN004). Though the FireCuda likely will work.
A bit off topic, but the latest WD Reds (WDxxEFAX) are SMR drives. WD is very hush-hush on this. It's unknown if they have a larger PMR section for temporary storage than their desktop counterparts.
Sandshark wrote:
StephenB wrote:
Personally I'd get a NAS-purposed drive - WD Red or Seagate Ironwolf (ST2000VN004). Though the FireCuda likely will work.
A bit off topic, but the latest WD Reds (WDxxEFAX) are SMR drives. WD is very hush-hush on this. It's unknown if they have a larger PMR section for temporary storage than their desktop counterparts.
Interesting. I'm seeing some posts out there on this, but nothing 100% certain. Synology's Hard Drive HCL has an SMR note for the 2 TB and 6 TB drive, but not for the 8 TB and 10 TB models. That's suspicious on it's face - there's no reason for anyone to build a 2 TB SMR drive. Still it's odd that WD isn't talking - it's a pretty basic question.
FWIW I have a couple of EFAXs (two in my primary NAS), and haven't see any performance issues.
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
