HDD Reliability (Refurbished esp)???

[SirNoobALot]

(background info first, can be skipped to get to main issue of refurbished drives after smileys)

I needed some more hdd space, and I have been following the BackBlaze data for some time now. They updated only 2 days ago: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/best-hard-drive/

After the annoyance of recovering data from failing/failed drives a number of times from my previous policy of "whatever drive is cheapest", I decided to go with reliability. HGST is the obvious choice, so I decided to go with two 2TB ultrastars...

I got the drives and was immediately suspicious.. Curiosity got the better of me and after some time with smartmon tools, I found that the SMART status had been wiped, and timer reset (wtf!). BUT they missed some internally-stored records of previous SMART autochecks, which recorded ~1.5-1.6 years of uptime on both drives as of last test. (New? HA!) Anyway, emailed the retailer and called them on it... they gave me a full refund, let me keep those two drives, AND sent me two drives that were actually new.



OK, so I have 2 new reliable drives, but what do I do with the 2 refurbished ones?

As drive size is increasing, I don't know how that affects reliability of refurbished drives. same? worse? Anyone here use refurbished drives and notice a difference?

It is worth noting that both drives now have about ~380 hours that I have put on them (purely redundant data storage), but SMART status is so far recording no errors.

I'm trying to decide between...

1. having them in a mirrored RAID setup (in case one fails), and using them like normal.

2. writing (and verifying) a full load of backup data on them then putting them in archival storage

or 3. Since they seem to be working well so far, just sell them on ebay while properly disclosing what I know about the drives.

The only thing about 3 is that I'd hate to sell them on the cheap if they might have normal reliability.

 

[timta2]

After reading this I'm sure I wouldn't ever trust anything BackBlaze says:

Dispelling Backblaze's HDD Reliability Myth - The Real Story Covered
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6...bility-myth-the-real-story-covered/index.html

I personally wouldn't use a refurbished drive, especially without some good backups, but that's just me.

 

[sk3tch]

After reading this I'm sure I wouldn't ever trust anything BackBlaze says:

Dispelling Backblaze's HDD Reliability Myth - The Real Story Covered
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6...bility-myth-the-real-story-covered/index.html

I personally wouldn't use a refurbished drive, especially without some good backups, but that's just me.

Did you really read that article if you "don't trust anything that BackBlaze says? It isn't that BackBlaze lied. It is just that their data is open for interpretation and not necessarily applicable to every scenario/use case. That author is nearly guilty of some of the things BackBlaze did (sensationalist headlines, etc.).

 

[Zedicus]

the problem with refurbs is its hard to verify that you are getting a MANUFACTURER refurb and not just a guy out of his garage replacing some CAPS and sticking a refurb label on the device. overalll i have liked using refurbed products as long as you can verify it as a manufacturer refurbished device.

 

[bigdogchris]

Typically, I'm not afraid of using refurbished products, However, with HDD's I've never had luck with refurbs. I've seen them out of the box with bad sectors and SMART errors. I've tried it a few times and decided it's just not worth it. HDD's are cheap, just buy new.

Regarding the Backblaze story, I don't have a problem with the data. Sure, their testing methods may be in question but how does that explain the enormous difference between HGST/WD and Seagate? If their test are bad and the cause of the failures, wouldn't all three show similar results?

 

[AlienTech]

I have to conclude that Seagate is paying people to attack anyone who bad mouths their drives. I found it really strange that people would attack me when I asked troubling questions, they have made their forums much harder to use and entirely changed it so many older messages were wiped. And this latest about attacking someone who only published raw data as being biased or something. They are not a review site, they just put out data showing their luck with different drives. I would think backblaze raw data is accurate. It is similar to many others with similar experience including my own. People were attacking me in all sort of manner. None of it made much sense until now. Seagate is a marketing company, they are not a technology company. They have invented nothing. By selling marginal products they made a lot of money and bought out everyone else who made anything worthwhile and now they think if they are losing business due to their marginal products and business practices it is because people are really finding out what the company is like. I have not mentioned any particular seagate drive so it would be hard to attack me but I bet I would be. I asked my room mate in 1990 when he bought a seagate 10mb drive for like $500 why he would spend that much money on crap. He said he had no choice since no one else made drives that cheap. The better ones cost over 1K a huge difference. Not all seagate drives are bad, some are really good.. But being a marketing company, the financial aspects get in there and end up buy cheaper parts causing problems. Seagate TB drives uses enterprise designs so quality can be very good. So can cost.. As days go by they find ever cheaper parts to replace to cut costs and ends up with like the 3TB drives in the example. Cant wait to see them trash the samsung quality as well which is the only quality they have left.