Using a ZFS-capable OS such as Solaris 11 and a SAS2008 controller, is there any reason not to be using SATA 6Gb/s 3TB drives, such as the hitachi H3IK30003272SW? From the testing I've done with single drives, they perform about 15-20% better than their 2TB 7K2000 brethren..
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
ZFS and 3TB
- Thread starter Astronot
- Start date
The fact that they perform better most likely would be attributed to higher data density; i think the xk3000 is 666GB platter?
Samsung F4 2TB drives would be cheaper per GB of storage. With more disks you would have lower redundancy overhead (i.e. a 6 disk RAID-Z2 with 3TB disks versus 10-disk RAID-Z2 with 2TB disks).
So there could be reasons to prefer 2TB; but i would make sure they use 666GB platters (newer type WD EARS, all Samsung F4 2TB and perhaps the Hitachi's too perhaps someone can confirm that.
Samsung F4 2TB drives would be cheaper per GB of storage. With more disks you would have lower redundancy overhead (i.e. a 6 disk RAID-Z2 with 3TB disks versus 10-disk RAID-Z2 with 2TB disks).
So there could be reasons to prefer 2TB; but i would make sure they use 666GB platters (newer type WD EARS, all Samsung F4 2TB and perhaps the Hitachi's too perhaps someone can confirm that.
I get that comparison, thanks. What about in a situation where the same quantity of drives will be used either way, such as an enclosure that will house 3x10 disk raidz2's in a single pool?
Also, these considerations aside, are there any technical issues currently that cause this not to be an adviseable route? I assume these hitachi drives aren't using 4k sectors, and in my testing they were detected correctly, so...
Also, these considerations aside, are there any technical issues currently that cause this not to be an adviseable route? I assume these hitachi drives aren't using 4k sectors, and in my testing they were detected correctly, so...
Well with 10-disk RAID-Z2 you would have a perfect combination for 4K disks, so that may not be that important anyway.
The Hitachi's have a decent speed, but the WD 3TB is rather slow (120MB/s); slower than the 2TB EARS (136MB/s). So i would choose between Hitachi or Samsung. Perhaps costs would be an important factor too, the Samsung F4 2TB is priced very low at the moment (in my area anyway) - not sure about the Hitachi's.
The Hitachi's have a decent speed, but the WD 3TB is rather slow (120MB/s); slower than the 2TB EARS (136MB/s). So i would choose between Hitachi or Samsung. Perhaps costs would be an important factor too, the Samsung F4 2TB is priced very low at the moment (in my area anyway) - not sure about the Hitachi's.