Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

HR34 and 4TB External Drive


  • Please log in to reply
131 replies to this topic

#26 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,324 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:59 AM

Hmm well that sucks ! I know the green drives are cheap 2tb's just over a 100 bucks !


~ the same price as the Red Caviars I saw on Amazon yesterday.

Rich

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#27 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,324 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:00 PM

Not that far from specifically mentioned "black" type, but just some changes in FW made them "enterprise" class with triple tag price.


Do you know if a SATA III drive will work on an HR?

Rich

#28 OFFLINE   Jacob Braun

Jacob Braun

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 986 posts
  • LocationTulsa, OK
Joined: Oct 05, 2011

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:05 PM

Do you know if a SATA III drive will work on an HR?

Rich


SATA III is backwards compatible, so yes, they will!
DirecTV Employee
The postings on this site are my own and do not represent DirecTV's positions, strategies, or opinions.

#29 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,324 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:15 PM

SATA III is backwards compatible, so yes, they will!


Thanx, now if some kind soul will buy one and try it...

Rich

#30 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,190 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:06 PM

Didn't read the specs for the Black drives. That WD site is nasty to navigate.

Rich


Yeah it is... They're the same drives we use at work in various RAID configurations. The same ones DELL uses in new servers. I sure hope they are ok for RAID setups. :lol:
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#31 OFFLINE   Beckzilla

Beckzilla

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 174 posts
Joined: Oct 28, 2007

Posted 15 November 2012 - 08:12 PM

That's the problem that needs fixing, not just on the 34, but on the rest of the HR lineup. All we need is the ability to have any HR within an account be able to read any HDD with content recorded by HRs within the same account.

Rich


I could not agree more!!
HR-34-Living room
Sony 60" TV
(3) Sony 42"ers
Sony 34"
Sony 24"
Denon AVR-3805 Receiver w/ (4) Infinity 200 watt speakers, (4) Infinity Surround Speakers and one Infinity subwoofer

#32 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,324 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:02 PM

Yeah it is... They're the same drives we use at work in various RAID configurations. The same ones DELL uses in new servers. I sure hope they are ok for RAID setups. :lol:


I was surprised to see that caveat about the Green Caviars and their incompatibility with RAID setups. That could have been there for years, I just happened to spot it.

Rich

#33 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,190 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:05 PM

I was surprised to see that caveat about the Green Caviars and their incompatibility with RAID setups. That could have been there for years, I just happened to spot it.

Rich


I'm not sure I understand it myself really.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#34 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,324 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:38 PM

I could not agree more!!


I have a feeling D* is gonna have to do something about swapping HDDs within an account because of the HR34. For "power users", the five tuners and 1TB drive just about demand that an external drive be put on the 34s. If the 34 fails, and they all do eventually, all recordings are lost, no matter how big an external drive you put on them, the way it stands now.

BTW, I have absolutely no "inside" info on this, it's just speculation. A lot of us would like to see this happen, but we've been fighting for it for years and nobody at D* seems to care.

Rich

#35 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,324 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:39 PM

I'm not sure I understand it myself really.


I should have bookmarked that page, I don't know if I could find it again.

Rich

#36 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,190 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:12 PM

I should have bookmarked that page, I don't know if I could find it again.

Rich


I tried searching "Green RAID" on their site and it gave me a link to a document. I clicked on that link and it just took me back to their home page. I copy/pasted the link and it just took me back to their home page. Looks like WD doesn't want anyone reading their docs.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#37 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,324 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:56 PM

I tried searching "Green RAID" on their site and it gave me a link to a document. I clicked on that link and it just took me back to their home page. I copy/pasted the link and it just took me back to their home page. Looks like WD doesn't want anyone reading their docs.


I'll try to find it. I searched for Red Cavs and found it in little tiny letters. Easy to miss.

Rich

#38 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 648 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 19 November 2012 - 03:52 PM

I'm not sure I understand it myself really.


It has to do with the error recovery procedure within the drive. Although it doesn't happen often these days, a given read or write may fail the first time (or first few times) but work if retried. The difference between enterprise and desktop drives is how aggressive/persistent the firmware is. That is, how many times will it retry and/or how long it will retry.

"Enterprise"/"RAID compatible" drives limit how long they will retry internally. This is so that duration is less than the time the RAID controller uses to decide the drive is bad.

"Desktop" drives either don't limit at all or have a limit that is too long. When used in a RAID configuration the drive might be considered defective when it is doing internal retries.

A failed sector on a drive does not necessarily mean the drive is a goner. Sector failures in a RAID configuration can easily be overcome as if nothing has happened. But to do that the RAID controller must know that it's a bad sector and not a bad drive (as evidenced by the drive not responding at all because it's hammering away on retries).

Bottom line is don't use desktop drives in RAID.

It isn't just a different setting in firmware that makes a desktop drive a lot cheaper. The warranty is a lot less. The quality is less at some manufacturing locations. For example, I understand that the latest Seagate desktop drives are manufactured in China and have a much higher failure rate as a result.

#39 OFFLINE   franklin_planner

franklin_planner

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 19 posts
Joined: Oct 12, 2011

Posted 20 November 2012 - 08:27 AM

Forgive me for "dumbing this down" but can someone explain the difference between the drive the OP talked about and the WD4001FAEX? Will either/both work in a BlackX enclosure? The WD4001FAEX is less expensive. Thanks.

#40 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 648 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 20 November 2012 - 11:01 AM

Forgive me for "dumbing this down" but can someone explain the difference between the drive the OP talked about and the WD4001FAEX? Will either/both work in a BlackX enclosure? The WD4001FAEX is less expensive. Thanks.


None of the BlacX have any RAID capability so it doesn't matter if the drive is RAID-friendly or not.

At a minimum, any RAID requires at least 2 drives. And it must have a RAID controller in the enclosure. This makes the multiple drives look like a single drive to the DVR. The BlacX Duet is dual drive but does not contain a RAID controller so even though it's only one cable (requiring the host to have a SATA port-multiplier-capable controller) the host software sees it as 2 distinct drives - which we know is useless for a DVR.

For completeness, the WD4000FYYZ is an enterprise drive and is RAID-friendly. The WD4001FAEX is a desktop drive and is not designed for RAID.

#41 OFFLINE   kevinturcotte

kevinturcotte

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,942 posts
  • LocationOutside Portland, ME
Joined: Dec 19, 2006

Posted 20 November 2012 - 12:51 PM

None of the BlacX have any RAID capability so it doesn't matter if the drive is RAID-friendly or not.

At a minimum, any RAID requires at least 2 drives. And it must have a RAID controller in the enclosure. This makes the multiple drives look like a single drive to the DVR. The BlacX Duet is dual drive but does not contain a RAID controller so even though it's only one cable (requiring the host to have a SATA port-multiplier-capable controller) the host software sees it as 2 distinct drives - which we know is useless for a DVR.

For completeness, the WD4000FYYZ is an enterprise drive and is RAID-friendly. The WD4001FAEX is a desktop drive and is not designed for RAID.


Can the HR line deal with RAID 1? Would this impact performance?

#42 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,190 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 20 November 2012 - 01:58 PM

Can the HR line deal with RAID 1? Would this impact performance?


I have 2 HR's running RAID1 right now and tested another running RAID5. The one that was running RAID5 is now running RAID0. No issues at all.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#43 OFFLINE   dpeters11

dpeters11

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,010 posts
  • LocationCincinnati
Joined: May 30, 2007

Posted 20 November 2012 - 03:27 PM

Don't the risks of raid 0 greatly exceed the benefit?

#44 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,190 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 20 November 2012 - 04:04 PM

Don't the risks of raid 0 greatly exceed the benefit?


What risk? There's no redundancy but I certainly don't see that as a risk.

It's no different than running off of one drive.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#45 OFFLINE   dpeters11

dpeters11

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,010 posts
  • LocationCincinnati
Joined: May 30, 2007

Posted 20 November 2012 - 04:50 PM

I'd see it as less reliable than running it off one. If either drive dies, you lose it. It seems to me there is a greater chance of that happening than one drive.

Of course we're not talking mission critical data here, and we know if the DVR dies, you lose everything essentially. But it's adding one more component to the mix.

#46 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 20,238 posts
  • LocationMediterranean Sea
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:01 PM

that's right and he knew that

#47 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,190 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 20 November 2012 - 10:20 PM

I'd see it as less reliable than running it off one. If either drive dies, you lose it. It seems to me there is a greater chance of that happening than one drive.

Of course we're not talking mission critical data here, and we know if the DVR dies, you lose everything essentially. But it's adding one more component to the mix.


I don't see it as a risk at all. If you're running off 1 drive and 1 drive fails you lose everything. If you're running RAID0 and you lose 1 drive you lose everything. Like I said before, it's no different than running off one drive.

The odds of 1 of the 2 drives in a RAID0 array failing are the same as 1 drive in a 1 drive setup failing.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#48 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,190 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 20 November 2012 - 10:21 PM

that's right and he knew that


Please don't speak for me. I know what I said and meant it.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#49 OFFLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Never say 'never'.

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,292 posts
  • LocationWinters, CA, between Napa and Sacramento
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 20 November 2012 - 10:49 PM

The odds of 1 of the 2 drives in a RAID0 array failing are the same as 1 drive in a 1 drive setup failing.


The odds of each single one failing is the same, but it's twice as likely as there are twice as many drives .
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#50 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,190 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 20 November 2012 - 10:54 PM

The odds of each single one failing is the same, but it's twice as likely as there are twice as many drives .


But a single failure is still a total loss. If it only takes a single drive failure to lose everything then the odds of you losing everything are the same as a single drive system. Same result, same odds, more space.

I use Enterprise Level drives, odds are lower.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT




Protected By... spam firewall...And...