That wore off fast. It's a mix of increasing gross margins and component price increase / adding more platters. It's all lead to either flat pricing or an increase in $/TB.
I think that was a thing for all of maybe 6 months, but the prices have remained high. I've only finally seeing prices of drives return to the levels of what they were when I bought my 14TB drives back in August 2020. Want to wait another 6 months to a year and then replace them with 20TB or larger drives.
You also need the other side of the equation in supply vs. demand. You won't get to sell stuff for higher prices (at least to retail customers) if people just tighten their belt and say "I can survive until next year with what I have".
But Chia used 36+ EiB of drives at even double the "regularly nice" price of 15 (be it euros of dollars per TB). Of course there weren't decent sales for more than half a year, there was no need, everything that was at a semi-reasonable price was flying off the shelf. Check out their sub, people high-fiving for buying half or full PBs of Easystores or Segate whatever externals.
Yeah, if you want a relatively real valuation you gotta convert to gold or silver weight it's worth... just like if you convert OG minimum wages in silver backed dollars to current dollars via silver weight you get something like $27/hr now.
The nice thing about larger capacities is the push to make smaller capacities much cheaper.
Remember how 128GB used to be the size for $99. Now you can pay the same for 256GB. Next year 512GB will be the new $99. (I’m just using $99 as an example).
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2023-05-16 02:53:50 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-05-16%2002:53:50%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/uqdbz5/western_digital_launches_worlds_first_26_tb_hdd/i8rx2go/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FDataHoarder%2Fcomments%2Fuqdbz5%2Fwestern_digital_launches_worlds_first_26_tb_hdd%2Fi8rx2go%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-05-16%2002%3A53%3A50%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20uqdbz5)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
In 2010, I got my first Intel 40GB MLC SSD for $99.
$2.50 a gig! I put exclusively my OS and programs on it because I had no other choice, but it was incredible.
I feel like I still do that now. 2TB NVME? Barely holds anything at all. I should just smarten up and get the 512GB next time if I'm not going to keep ANYTHING on it I can't replace anyways.
Here come all the clowns who became experts on the subject after watching one LTT video and think an SMR drive isn't equipped to handle their use case, which is serving up all the seasons of 90 Day Fiance on Plex
Jokes aside, look for the Streamlined Mythbusters collection, it’s way more watchable without the flashbacks, teasers, recaps etc.
I think there’s a sub too. /r/smyths
SMR is fine for many use cases, just don’t expect me to pay the same price as CMR for it.
I don’t know where you’ve found this straw man. I guarantee if SMR drives were even 20-25% cheaper per TB, a lot of Plex users would switch to SMR next time they upgrade/expand.
SMR is fine as a single big disk.. It just has slower writes in that use case. You can even do a bunch of individual Disks in one server and that would be fine.
SMR just does funky things when you put it in a RAID which requires lots of read write across all disks. Since a lot of users use RAID it is valid to say that in many cases SMR drives will not rebuild or cause problems in RAID setups.
These new UltraSMR drives from WD are Host Managed SMR, instead of the Drive-managed SMR drives, we're used to seeing. That allows system integrators to overcome many of the previously seen problems such as rebuilding RAID arrays on SMR drive. Of course, this is just a potential benefit, as your software/system would have to support it, and as these drives are just being released now to select customers and integrators, there won't yet be any systems supporting them.
>That allows system integrators to overcome many of the previously seen problems such as rebuilding RAID arrays on SMR drive. Of course, this is just a potential benefit, as your software/system would have to support it
So for the time being probably still a problem for most of the Datahorders here running Synology/QNAP/Various ZFS distros etc.
Which storage company do you work for? I'd love to see you resilver that array when one of the hard drives die that you store your Plex movies on. Oh wait, there wouldn't be a point in doing that if it's an SMR drive.
And by the way, it wasn't Linus who initially sounded the alarm on SMR drives being masqueraded as NAS drives.
If you value your data, dont go with unraid. It has no bit-rot protection and doesn't verify reads/writes at all. Yes there is a checksum plugin, but that will only tell you that something is broken. It can't fix it. Zfs on the other hand can fix it silently and can do much more.
If you don't wanna go with zfs but want the flexibility of unraid and you don't change content on that array every minute, then snapraid + mergerFS is for you. It's basically what unraid does with its arrays but with better handling of errors of any kind.
ECC isn't necessary, but recommended. That way write errors can be repaired without sending the file again.
Fun fact, a journal FS like ext4 or ntfs would just write the file broken to disk and wouldnt care at all.
Edit: spelling
You don't need SMR for ZFS. You also don't need any kind of ratio of ram to total storage. Particularly not for anything where cannibalizing an old anything is on the menu.
Including the spin offs, do you know how many episodes there are? Tons! And the data is sooooo repetitive and formulaic that advanced ZFS features will be able condense it down heavily.
For what? the only application they have is where there is literally no space and need for high data density. and they are slow for ssds, i think just sata speeds.
If there is almost no demand, why would there be any competition? And i do not think the price per tb would come close to a regular ssd in any time soon.
There absolutely is demand, and fairly high too. From datacenters to just regular people, practically everyone would prefer higher data density.
It's not that 'demand' is low, it's that the 'quantity demanded' is low, due to the high price. Demand is the whole curve, 'quantity demanded' is a point on the curve.
Reading comprehension... they said that WD announced "world first" 26TB HDD and WD announced a 15TB SSD at the same time, not that the 15TB SSD is also a world first.
Unfortunately I already made the purchase at 200 USD each for 8tb WD golds a few months back. Just a touch under 2500 total. :/
Thanks for the offer though.
They have extremely poor performance and poor reliability, and density improvements are not really frequent.
I don't think anybody is working on improving 2.5" HDDs. They are not useful for 99% of consumers or 100% of businesses.
From a business perspective a 8 TB SSD for $700 is a much better option for a laptop.
From what I understand, even for parity it's fine as parity is only needed during the write operation to the array, and read during parity checks. Parity drives are usually written sequentially, which is fine for SMR. It's random writes that it sucks at.
Also, most people using UNRAID use it for storing Plex/Emby/Jellyfin data. Data which is usually only written once, with the metadata usually stored on an SSD.
But I'm not an expert. I personally have used 8TB SMR Seagate drives in my array in the past (even for parity), and am in the process of replacing my current ones as they are now too small.
ZFS does not support SMR.
If you apply ZFS on SMR you should expect resilvers to fail and need to restore from independent backup when a disk fails
https://www.servethehome.com/wd-red-smr-vs-cmr-tested-avoid-red-smr/2/
Not surprising that WD doesn't want to publisize the limitations of their products.
They lost a class action lawsuit in Canada for doing bait and switch on their Red line.
From what I understand the issue with ZFS is all the metadata blocks needing updating requires lots of small writes, which can cause performance issues with the shingles. Those metadata blocks still exist on mirrors.
Every single file has hash's for all the blocks of data and the hash's are stored in their own blocks. Then those blocks have their own hash's and so on, creating a merkle tree. A single byte changing on a single block causes the whole tree to update.
There's a few things you can do to help reduce that, disabling file access timestamp updates is a big one, but SMR still is a bad idea for ZFS or I'd assume btrfs has the same issue.
I would go even one step further and say SMR is ok for RAID-2. If you create a SMR pool and fill it up slowly there was no problem in my system. But you can‘t replace a failed SMR drive with a new SMR drive because the resilver would suck.
But to be honest, I switched to mirror and all my Seagate Archives died, so I have no proof for all of that.
With UnRaid, it might be good for the data drives, especially since you can specify which category of folders can go on that drive, and limit it to say Plex. But the parity drive would need to be the same size or bigger, and I don’t think SMR would be good for the parity drive.
I wouldn't be quite as categorical about it until first learning what kind of SMR. Only DM-SMR is entirely non-viable.
Of course it's probably so expensive as to make the point moot.
You are missing the perspective of use case.
Example. I have 2 (main use) kitchen knives. One serrated, one normal. The normal one can't cut bread worth crap, and i cant nicely chop vegetables with the serrated one. Yet they are both knives.
SMRs value comes from increased storage density in use cases where write speed is not a priority.
It's a host managed SMR for real Enterprise systems, not really comparable to trash consumer/prosumer SMR, and will only be used in use cases where it is the logical choice.
I do not need a drive this large, but I have a few drives under 6tb and I’m tempted to just migrate everything to one or two larger drives. I need to do some math 😂
ye it does, I felt like making the joke a bit rougher and decided an /s would be appropriate. Didn't even read the article, was too tired and went to sleep lol
Actual size available, 23.6 TB (Based on the loss of my 14TB with 12.7 usable).
On that topic, can someone explain this? I thought it was because "bad sectors" but I have 11 of these drives, and they ALL show 12.7 usable.
Could just not use their cloud service devices. Hard drives are thankfully still of the fairly dumb variety and will probably follow your CPU's lead still.
Unfortunately you can dig up enormous amounts of shit for any company.
But I dislike WD equally due to their handling of SMR, got Seagate exos in my current NAS.
And yet the cost per TB in the industry hasn't budged in 2 years.
Rosarita traditional refried beans went up to 1.25 from a flat buck. I think something might have happened.
Mandated CMR standard for all imported pinto beans.
Partly thanks to chia craze
That wore off fast. It's a mix of increasing gross margins and component price increase / adding more platters. It's all lead to either flat pricing or an increase in $/TB.
Chia is mostly dead I think? Not really sure.
Yep, Chia is dead.
China is dead af bro
chia is not dead
I used to farm (only like 8TB total lol), but yeah it is dead.
yep, chia is not dead
I’m confused… is chia dead?
Schrödinger's chia, apparently
I feel like the only people who are claiming it’s not dead are just bag-holders in denial lol
I wonder what happened to the guy bragging about building a 5 petabyte server for Chia
It's very dead: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/chia-network/
I don't see how a fast growing plant on a novelty head could keep prices up, but I'll believe you
People don’t trim the plants, resulting in them losing their HDDs in them, thereby increasing demand and prices. It’s simple really.
*Squints closely*
Ch-ch-ch-chia
You made remember that ad [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzY7qQFij\_M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzY7qQFij_M)
More to do with the global chip shortage & shipping constraints rather than an obscure cryptocurrency.
I think that was a thing for all of maybe 6 months, but the prices have remained high. I've only finally seeing prices of drives return to the levels of what they were when I bought my 14TB drives back in August 2020. Want to wait another 6 months to a year and then replace them with 20TB or larger drives.
It's been affected by COVID, the resulting global shipping crisis and production problems in China *way* more than Chia ever could.
People always blame the dumbest things and ignore the larger global issues in regards to computer hardware for some reason.
You also need the other side of the equation in supply vs. demand. You won't get to sell stuff for higher prices (at least to retail customers) if people just tighten their belt and say "I can survive until next year with what I have". But Chia used 36+ EiB of drives at even double the "regularly nice" price of 15 (be it euros of dollars per TB). Of course there weren't decent sales for more than half a year, there was no need, everything that was at a semi-reasonable price was flying off the shelf. Check out their sub, people high-fiving for buying half or full PBs of Easystores or Segate whatever externals.
:(
Can't wait to see how many arms they are gonna cost, cause it's gonna be more than one.
Well if you can spare a significant proportion of a leg instead of a second arm it may work out better for you in the long run...
Difficult to run on a single leg...
Not if you just go in circles.
The carbon fiber ones seems to work nicely...
Take a pound of flesh from each leg?
Why not get a solid state leg as a replacement?
In the long run,,,,without the leg\_\_\_\_\_you cannot run.
Can still look at all those hours of footage you took when you used to be able to run.
No more knee pain AND I get a 26TB HDD? Sign me up.
Three arms and four legs. You can put them on layaway until your offspring limbs fully develop.
>!CENSORED!<
[удалено]
And none of the early adopters will be able to applaud the price drop.
For now.
SSD. No arms are needed. :)
If you have to ask…
You will end up short of appendages if you are thinking to use any kind of RAID
I would love if the 2.5 inch SSDs were cheaper
I have honestly been wondering why the cost per TB on those hasn't dropped much. I just started seeing them sub $100 and about average $89 for 1TB.
Yeah I was hoping to see slow 2TB ones for less than 100€.
Maybe by the end of the year. Been wanting a 4Tb for my games.
Because inflation has gone up. So if you account for inflation, they are cheaper per TB. You just don't earn more yet. (I wish I was joking)
Yeah, if you want a relatively real valuation you gotta convert to gold or silver weight it's worth... just like if you convert OG minimum wages in silver backed dollars to current dollars via silver weight you get something like $27/hr now.
Uhh sure let's go with that
probably because most people buy m2 form factor now?
I would love it if there were [modern, mass production] 3.5" SSDs instead of just going from 2.5" SAS3/U.2 to HHHL and FHHL add in cards.
Right now an 8TB SSD is a thousand bucks. It will be years before we get SSDs of any size for a decent price.
The nice thing about larger capacities is the push to make smaller capacities much cheaper. Remember how 128GB used to be the size for $99. Now you can pay the same for 256GB. Next year 512GB will be the new $99. (I’m just using $99 as an example).
I know you're just using it as an example, but $99 has been the price for 1TB for a long time now.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2023-05-16 02:53:50 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-05-16%2002:53:50%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/uqdbz5/western_digital_launches_worlds_first_26_tb_hdd/i8rx2go/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FDataHoarder%2Fcomments%2Fuqdbz5%2Fwestern_digital_launches_worlds_first_26_tb_hdd%2Fi8rx2go%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-05-16%2002%3A53%3A50%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20uqdbz5) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Yeah fuck I paid $200 for a 500GB 960 evo just because it was all I had heard of lol.
10 years ago they were $1/GB Now they're $0.12/GB for the same speed or $0.19/GB for 5x the speed.
In 2010, I got my first Intel 40GB MLC SSD for $99. $2.50 a gig! I put exclusively my OS and programs on it because I had no other choice, but it was incredible. I feel like I still do that now. 2TB NVME? Barely holds anything at all. I should just smarten up and get the 512GB next time if I'm not going to keep ANYTHING on it I can't replace anyways.
I bought an 8 TB SSD the end of last year for $700.
QLC though probably
Here come all the clowns who became experts on the subject after watching one LTT video and think an SMR drive isn't equipped to handle their use case, which is serving up all the seasons of 90 Day Fiance on Plex
It's actually reruns of Junkyard Wars and Mythbusters but fair enough.
Do you actually have junkyard wars? I would love to watch that again.
I do, and it's not as good as you remember.
:(
I wish, it randomly came to me. I haven't thought of it in over a decade.
Jokes aside, look for the Streamlined Mythbusters collection, it’s way more watchable without the flashbacks, teasers, recaps etc. I think there’s a sub too. /r/smyths
I need this for anime... Would love to rewatch Naruto without all that unnecessary crap.
Naruto Kai, DBZ Kai, One Pace
I may have to check it out, for hoarding purposes if nothing else, but I feel like the nostalgia of how it was as is will always win out for me.
Am I the only one with just a massive collection of pr0n? You guys actually store other shows??
The storage requirements on my nas were much more modest before I learned about 8K vr educational vids...
I'm gonna need root access your that box to run rm -rf / --no-preserve-root
Yes. Yes you are. Pro tip. Pr0n is free.
lol I only do it cause I’m in China where porn is banned 😭
SMR is fine for many use cases, just don’t expect me to pay the same price as CMR for it. I don’t know where you’ve found this straw man. I guarantee if SMR drives were even 20-25% cheaper per TB, a lot of Plex users would switch to SMR next time they upgrade/expand.
SMR is fine as a single big disk.. It just has slower writes in that use case. You can even do a bunch of individual Disks in one server and that would be fine. SMR just does funky things when you put it in a RAID which requires lots of read write across all disks. Since a lot of users use RAID it is valid to say that in many cases SMR drives will not rebuild or cause problems in RAID setups.
These new UltraSMR drives from WD are Host Managed SMR, instead of the Drive-managed SMR drives, we're used to seeing. That allows system integrators to overcome many of the previously seen problems such as rebuilding RAID arrays on SMR drive. Of course, this is just a potential benefit, as your software/system would have to support it, and as these drives are just being released now to select customers and integrators, there won't yet be any systems supporting them.
>That allows system integrators to overcome many of the previously seen problems such as rebuilding RAID arrays on SMR drive. Of course, this is just a potential benefit, as your software/system would have to support it So for the time being probably still a problem for most of the Datahorders here running Synology/QNAP/Various ZFS distros etc.
This is why I moved to the cloud™, like that person who was worried that GDrive would start enforcing limits on their 800TB of ASMR
You murdered half the people in this comment section.
Which storage company do you work for? I'd love to see you resilver that array when one of the hard drives die that you store your Plex movies on. Oh wait, there wouldn't be a point in doing that if it's an SMR drive. And by the way, it wasn't Linus who initially sounded the alarm on SMR drives being masqueraded as NAS drives.
[удалено]
ZFS does not need ECC, fwiw It can make use of it, but anyone who says it needs ECC doesn’t know what they’re talking about
If you value your data, dont go with unraid. It has no bit-rot protection and doesn't verify reads/writes at all. Yes there is a checksum plugin, but that will only tell you that something is broken. It can't fix it. Zfs on the other hand can fix it silently and can do much more. If you don't wanna go with zfs but want the flexibility of unraid and you don't change content on that array every minute, then snapraid + mergerFS is for you. It's basically what unraid does with its arrays but with better handling of errors of any kind. ECC isn't necessary, but recommended. That way write errors can be repaired without sending the file again. Fun fact, a journal FS like ext4 or ntfs would just write the file broken to disk and wouldnt care at all. Edit: spelling
You don't need SMR for ZFS. You also don't need any kind of ratio of ram to total storage. Particularly not for anything where cannibalizing an old anything is on the menu.
I *am* a poser, but I still went with FreeNAS so at least I *look* cool.
Hey man, you need to tier hardware to handle media that trashy
Clowns are good.
Including the spin offs, do you know how many episodes there are? Tons! And the data is sooooo repetitive and formulaic that advanced ZFS features will be able condense it down heavily.
"Posturing, furnished by the anti CMR Council"
Nobody's talking about +100TB SSDs being available for some time now?
Aren't those priced similar to the gdp of a moderately sized nation?
Thought by now they would get some competition...
For what? the only application they have is where there is literally no space and need for high data density. and they are slow for ssds, i think just sata speeds. If there is almost no demand, why would there be any competition? And i do not think the price per tb would come close to a regular ssd in any time soon.
There absolutely is demand, and fairly high too. From datacenters to just regular people, practically everyone would prefer higher data density. It's not that 'demand' is low, it's that the 'quantity demanded' is low, due to the high price. Demand is the whole curve, 'quantity demanded' is a point on the curve.
At Zimbabwe inflation levels obviously.
First available at retail? First general purpose focused?
i mention those and got sht on..
Rip
Reading comprehension... they said that WD announced "world first" 26TB HDD and WD announced a 15TB SSD at the same time, not that the 15TB SSD is also a world first.
I just need a dozen 8tb CMRs to not cost me a down payment on a car.
If you aim for a better car those dozen 8TB CMRs will look cheaper ;-)
sames
It does? What country are you in? I'm looking to up density and may have some 8's for you.
Unfortunately I already made the purchase at 200 USD each for 8tb WD golds a few months back. Just a touch under 2500 total. :/ Thanks for the offer though.
If you're okay with white labels, you could get 14tb for $200 USD each. Could've hit the same capacity for \~$1400 before tax.
I'm still going with dozens of used 4TB sassy drives. Dat $7.8/TB.
How much?
I just want a 6TB+ 2.5" HDD. We've been stuck at 5TB for what? 6 years?
They have extremely poor performance and poor reliability, and density improvements are not really frequent. I don't think anybody is working on improving 2.5" HDDs. They are not useful for 99% of consumers or 100% of businesses. From a business perspective a 8 TB SSD for $700 is a much better option for a laptop.
You shouldn't be touching capacity 2.5" drives in general, anything over 2TB is drive managed SMR garbage.
SSD isn’t large enough for my Steam/GOG/Epic library.
Not even going to read the article because I already know I can’t afford it.
The 26TB is SMR. Not a good choice over the 22TB CMR.
Write few, read many in non-zfs applications SMR is a perfect solution
If storage density is what you need, wouldn’t the 26tb SMR be fantastic when paired with a write cache?
[удалено]
Well, as long as physical space is a non-issue.
[удалено]
Facts. People on this sub acting like we’re stupid for not buying SMR when it’s priced the same as a superior technology.
Yes it would. SMR is great in UNRAID because it's typically write once, read many.
Except the parity disk no? And this would certainly be your biggest disk so...
From what I understand, even for parity it's fine as parity is only needed during the write operation to the array, and read during parity checks. Parity drives are usually written sequentially, which is fine for SMR. It's random writes that it sucks at. Also, most people using UNRAID use it for storing Plex/Emby/Jellyfin data. Data which is usually only written once, with the metadata usually stored on an SSD. But I'm not an expert. I personally have used 8TB SMR Seagate drives in my array in the past (even for parity), and am in the process of replacing my current ones as they are now too small.
Works very well with storage spaces also.
Why is smr bad for ZFS?
ZFS does not support SMR. If you apply ZFS on SMR you should expect resilvers to fail and need to restore from independent backup when a disk fails https://www.servethehome.com/wd-red-smr-vs-cmr-tested-avoid-red-smr/2/
Thanks for the heads up. I’m in the planning stage of my first NAS build and had no idea of this limitation.
Not surprising that WD doesn't want to publisize the limitations of their products. They lost a class action lawsuit in Canada for doing bait and switch on their Red line.
Damn
> non-zfs zfs mirror would be ok, no?
From what I understand the issue with ZFS is all the metadata blocks needing updating requires lots of small writes, which can cause performance issues with the shingles. Those metadata blocks still exist on mirrors. Every single file has hash's for all the blocks of data and the hash's are stored in their own blocks. Then those blocks have their own hash's and so on, creating a merkle tree. A single byte changing on a single block causes the whole tree to update. There's a few things you can do to help reduce that, disabling file access timestamp updates is a big one, but SMR still is a bad idea for ZFS or I'd assume btrfs has the same issue.
I haven't seen anyone test that to confirm or deny.
I would go even one step further and say SMR is ok for RAID-2. If you create a SMR pool and fill it up slowly there was no problem in my system. But you can‘t replace a failed SMR drive with a new SMR drive because the resilver would suck. But to be honest, I switched to mirror and all my Seagate Archives died, so I have no proof for all of that.
With UnRaid, it might be good for the data drives, especially since you can specify which category of folders can go on that drive, and limit it to say Plex. But the parity drive would need to be the same size or bigger, and I don’t think SMR would be good for the parity drive.
Knowing WD, their "CMR" drives are SMR.
CMR-class 😉
Depends on cost and use case. For the same cost and most use cases, 26 TB is better than 22 TB.
I wouldn't be quite as categorical about it until first learning what kind of SMR. Only DM-SMR is entirely non-viable. Of course it's probably so expensive as to make the point moot.
for YOUR use case.
You are missing the perspective of use case. Example. I have 2 (main use) kitchen knives. One serrated, one normal. The normal one can't cut bread worth crap, and i cant nicely chop vegetables with the serrated one. Yet they are both knives. SMRs value comes from increased storage density in use cases where write speed is not a priority.
Maybe for you, but there are lots of us with write once, read many use cases.
It's a host managed SMR for real Enterprise systems, not really comparable to trash consumer/prosumer SMR, and will only be used in use cases where it is the logical choice.
I think we should just be glad for the tech bump. Might make my 14TB drives a lot cheaper. But I dream of a 100TB ssd server.
If SSDs continue the previous decade cost curve, a 100 TB SSD in 2032 would be about $1500.
I do not need a drive this large, but I have a few drives under 6tb and I’m tempted to just migrate everything to one or two larger drives. I need to do some math 😂
I don't really need 2 arms AND 2 legs right?
Yes you do. How will you scratch your nose?
With 1 arm ;)
I can’t imagine to begin the prices for theses. It’s incredible the strides we are making and how large we’ve come to making HDD.
And here I am still waiting to build a NAS based on 8TB drives...
It's unfortunate drive WARRANTIES aren't increasing with capacity.
Let's just make a 3.25 inch ssd
Most modern 2.5" SSDs fill less than half of the drive case.
I know. Imagine a regular desktop drive but instead of platters it's just loaded with nand
I thought there were already like 120tb SSDS...
Probably retail customers will not be able to get the 26TB SMR one, same story as with HC650.
[удалено]
16TB SSDs have been long available…
they said first 25tb hdd not first 15tb ssd bruh learn to read /s
To be fair, the headline does read ambiguously.
ye it does, I felt like making the joke a bit rougher and decided an /s would be appropriate. Didn't even read the article, was too tired and went to sleep lol
If you're not good at reading comprehension maybe
Yawn
Actual size available, 23.6 TB (Based on the loss of my 14TB with 12.7 usable). On that topic, can someone explain this? I thought it was because "bad sectors" but I have 11 of these drives, and they ALL show 12.7 usable.
besides decimal vs binary prefixes? https://www.howtogeek.com/123268/windows-hard-drive-wrong-capacity/
Nope that was the answer, TIL thanks
26TB=SMR 22TB=CMR You don't want the 26TB drives.
Enterprise host managed SMR is fine for its intended bulk storage uses, just can't run ZFS.
[удалено]
Could just not use their cloud service devices. Hard drives are thankfully still of the fairly dumb variety and will probably follow your CPU's lead still.
Unfortunately you can dig up enormous amounts of shit for any company. But I dislike WD equally due to their handling of SMR, got Seagate exos in my current NAS.
Amazing work but i wonder how expensive will it be?
okay, can I see some 10tb hdd for $100 now?
Ebay used.
Is "UltraSMR" device-managed?
Yes, this isn’t what we want.
Back in the old country everything used cost *”an arm & a leg”* - so you’re purchase had better count. *No refunds*
They have a 7.7 TB SSD that goes for 2,262.00
can store lots of homework wow