• 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Interesting, from that data it seems SSD reliability so far isn’t too far off from HDDs (at least for Backblaze’s intensive cloud storage workload) despite having no moving parts…

    Will be interesting to see how the reliability plays out as they build up their SSD inventory over the coming years

    • Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. Consumer use cases of SSDs sees a tremendous benefit if only for accidental damage reasons, but for enterprise data center use I would not have expected the same overall rates of failure.

    • running_ragged@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think you’re reading that chart wrong.

      Curcial and WD havea much higher rate on average across all their models.

      The 800% is only because they had a single drive for a certain model, and it failed within 2 months. They have a lot of other Seagate models that are much older on average without any failures.

      Seems like a shining recommendation to me.