Want storage solution 10-15TB

[Winglam]

Did you modify the firmware (WD's TLER utility to adjust the recovery timings)?

I ask, as that drive's not actually on the HDD Compatibility List. What this means, is those drives are unstable with their original (based on my own experience using unadjusted firmware). No matter if they're internal or external.

It's easily rectified though. A PC is the easiest way to do it though (others have had a very difficult time doing this on MP's).

Sorry, I am new to raid & I have never heard of it.
I did not modify the firmware; where can I find a tutorial for how to adjust the recovery timings for my HDDs.

I need to know the length of the external cable used with the Sans Digital enclosure since they're no longer attached internally via a break-out cable.

The SFF-8088 toSFF-8088 cable is 39.25 inch = 0.99695 meters, almost 1 meter long - (from the tip of the SFF-8088 plug on both sides) .

The adapter in the enclosure is fine. I meant add-on (i.e. they make internal to external bracket adapters - fits a PCI bracket). They're unstable with SATA drives. Read the next part, as it's critically important.

If you're talking about something like this used inside the MP, then that's the problem. They are likely to be found in the enclosure though (some use break-out cables, others to 4x SATA per SFF-8088 port).

To use an internal port on the card with an external enclosure, you need to use one of these. It's the longest version you can use with SATA drives as well, so DO NOT get a longer cable, or you'll still have the same problem.

It's what I was trying to explain earlier with the voltages used between SATA and SAS drives. Such adapters are fine with SAS, as they run at 20 volts, but not with SATA, which is 600mV max (less than 1 volt). That's also why the cable length is critical as well.

I believe the enclosure has the 1-Port SFF-8087 to SFF-8088 Adapter to convert the cable, not sure...but the appearance of the adapter is as similar as the one that you have shown me. so how can i fix it? is the 1m SFF-8087 to SFF-8088 SAS Cable the only way to solve the problem?, or is it going to solve the problem if I get an other brand of enclosure that has the break-out cables, others to 4x SATA per SFF-8088 port (NOT the External 8088 to Internal 8087 L Bracket Adapter that you mentioned) to convert a SFF-8088 port? or Do you have any recommendation for external enclosure that compatible with 1680ix? since I still have chance to refund the San Digital Tr4x?

Are these working fine?

I'd use a 4x 2.5" backplane enclosure that fits in the empty optical bay, and use a break-out cable. About $90USD (cheaper than the HDD kit offered by MaxUpgrades in order to use 3rd party cards and the HDD bays).

Then run the mechanicals in the external enclosure.

It would work, and be the most cost effective way to do it. BTW, I'd get enterprise HDD's for use with the RAID card. Modding the TLER values is fine for backup, but I wouldn't trust it for a primary array.

Also make sure you've a good backup solution (doubly critical with RAID 0) and a UPS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winglam View Post
4 x WD black HDDs split into 3 volumes: 1600GB raid 10 array 64kb for storage,
500GB raid 0 128kb for editing, 300GB raid 0 64kb for scratch disk,
that connected to 1680ix using maxupgrade backpanel attachment.[/color]
You've lost me a bit here.

Is this 4x drives that have been split into mulitple partitions? Or are there other drives involved here?

The 4 x SSD raid 0 array works fine with the maxupgrade solution; they occupy one of my DVD bay.

yes, it is a 4 x drives that has been split into multiple partition; I use it for backup, scratch disk for photoshop & final cut, & temporary editing for fast rendering. I will have a second back up using the WD20ears.

Thx, NanoFrog, I have been searching the solution for 2 monthes & got no result.

Did you modify the firmware (WD's TLER utility to adjust the recovery timings)?

I ask, as that drive's not actually on the HDD Compatibility List. What this means, is those drives are unstable with their original (based on my own experience using unadjusted firmware). No matter if they're internal or external.

It's easily rectified though. A PC is the easiest way to do it though (others have had a very difficult time doing this on MP's).


I need to know the length of the external cable used with the Sans Digital enclosure since they're no longer attached internally via a break-out cable.


The adapter in the enclosure is fine. I meant add-on (i.e. they make internal to external bracket adapters - fits a PCI bracket). They're unstable with SATA drives. Read the next part, as it's critically important.

If you're talking about something like this used inside the MP, then that's the problem. They are likely to be found in the enclosure though (some use break-out cables, others to 4x SATA per SFF-8088 port).

To use an internal port on the card with an external enclosure, you need to use one of these. It's the longest version you can use with SATA drives as well, so DO NOT get a longer cable, or you'll still have the same problem.

It's what I was trying to explain earlier with the voltages used between SATA and SAS drives. Such adapters are fine with SAS, as they run at 20 volts, but not with SATA, which is 600mV max (less than 1 volt). That's also why the cable length is critical as well.


Use the external cable with between the SFF-8088 port on the Areca and the enclosure. Get rid of any adapters you may be using. It's simple and direct.

If you have to use an internal port (or will in the future for expansion), then use the internal to external cable I linked (SFF-8087 to SFF-8088).


Are these working fine?

I'd use a 4x 2.5" backplane enclosure that fits in the empty optical bay, and use a break-out cable. About $90USD (cheaper than the HDD kit offered by MaxUpgrades in order to use 3rd party cards and the HDD bays).

Then run the mechanicals in the external enclosure.

It would work, and be the most cost effective way to do it. BTW, I'd get enterprise HDD's for use with the RAID card. Modding the TLER values is fine for backup, but I wouldn't trust it for a primary array.

Also make sure you've a good backup solution (doubly critical with RAID 0) and a UPS.


You've lost me a bit here.

Is this 4x drives that have been split into mulitple partitions? Or are there other drives involved here?

 

[nanofrog]

Sorry, I am new to raid & I have never heard of it.
I did not modify the firmware; where can I find a tutorial for how to adjust the recovery timings for my HDDs.

Here's a couple of links that should help, including a copy of the utility itself.
Wiki page on TLER
RAID gets Revisited (TLER and the WDTLER utility)

WDTLER utility (.zip file download link I found)

This will be more difficult to accomplish on a Mac, but it's possible:
a. Use a USB floppy, and run a DOS boot disk with the WDTLER utility
b. Try the Ultimate Boot CD (contains the WDTLER utility IIRC) after you burn the .iso.

Personally, it seems like it'd be easier to put the drives in a PC or even a laptop via an eSATA card (laptop = PC BTW).

The SFF-8088 toSFF-8088 cable is 39.25 inch = 0.99695 meters, almost 1 meter long - (from the tip of the SFF-8088 plug on both sides) .

That's fine then.

[I believe the enclosure has the 1-Port SFF-8087 to SFF-8088 Adapter to convert the cable, not sure...but the appearance of the adapter is as similar as the one that you have shown me. so how can i fix it? is the 1m SFF-8087 to SFF-8088 SAS Cable the only way to solve the problem?, or is it going to solve the problem if I get an other brand of enclosure that has the break-out cables, others to 4x SATA per SFF-8088 port (NOT the External 8088 to Internal 8087 L Bracket Adapter that you mentioned) to convert a SFF-8088 port? or Do you have any recommendation for external enclosure that compatible with 1680ix? since I still have chance to refund the San Digital Tr4x?

The adapter I linked is meant to be installed in the system (MP). That in the enclosure is necessary, and cannot be avoided. But a unit in the MP can be, and is necessary when using SATA drives.

But if you're using the external port on the back of the RAID card to the enclosure, then you're fine.

yes, it is a 4 x drives that has been split into multiple partition; I use it for backup, scratch disk for photoshop & final cut, & temporary editing for fast rendering. I will have a second back up using the WD20ears.

I wouldn't do this.

The reason is, as you partition the drives, you're limiting the data to slower tracks. And if these arrays are accessed simultaneously, it will slow you down.

Either leave it as a single array (just use folders to file data), or get additional drives for separate arrays.

BTW: NEVER use the primary array to contain it's own backup. Use a separate drive. The reason is simple. If the array goes, you're backup is gone too, and then you're up #$%^'s creek without a paddle.

Also, RAID /= Backup. Not ever. You can use an array to backup another, but it's done via backup software. They must be independent of one another to do this.

Otherwise, just use a single drive, or a JBOD set (i.e. eSATA card + Port Mulitplier enclosure). JBOD is configured via Disk Utility. I wouldn't ever recommend using a stripe set (RAID 0) as a backup either, as it's just not safe enough - one drive goes, and the data is gone.

 

[Winglam]

Hi Nanofrog,

those are valuable information, I have been looking for the solution for 2 months...yeah...

Here's a couple of links that should help, including a copy of the utility itself.
Wiki page on TLER
RAID gets Revisited (TLER and the WDTLER utility)

WDTLER utility (.zip file download link I found)

This will be more difficult to accomplish on a Mac, but it's possible:
a. Use a USB floppy, and run a DOS boot disk with the WDTLER utility
b. Try the Ultimate Boot CD (contains the WDTLER utility IIRC) after you burn the .iso.

Personally, it seems like it'd be easier to put the drives in a PC or even a laptop via an eSATA card (laptop = PC BTW).

I will grab a desktop pretty quick tmr updating the HDDs with 7 second read & write, lets see if I still have the problem connecting the enclosure & the raid card. If it does not work,
I will try the other method you mention about, connecting the raid controller & the enclosure through the internal SFF-8087 to external SFF-8088 cable.

The adapter I linked is meant to be installed in the system (MP). That in the enclosure is necessary, and cannot be avoided. But a unit in the MP can be, and is necessary when using SATA drives.

But if you're using the external port on the back of the RAID card to the enclosure, then you're fine.

umm, do you mean that if using SATA drive, it is necessary to avoid to use the converting adapter for a cleaner directly connection? and is it possible to use it (the converting adapter) with SAS drives?

I wouldn't do this.

The reason is, as you partition the drives, you're limiting the data to slower tracks. And if these arrays are accessed simultaneously, it will slow you down.

Either leave it as a single array (just use folders to file data), or get additional drives for separate arrays.

BTW: NEVER use the primary array to contain it's own backup. Use a separate drive. The reason is simple. If the array goes, you're backup is gone too, and then you're up #$%^'s creek without a paddle.

Also, RAID /= Backup. Not ever. You can use an array to backup another, but it's done via backup software. They must be independent of one another to do this.

Otherwise, just use a single drive, or a JBOD set (i.e. eSATA card + Port Mulitplier enclosure). JBOD is configured via Disk Utility. I wouldn't ever recommend using a stripe set (RAID 0) as a backup either, as it's just not safe enough - one drive goes, and the data is gone.

does it make a difference, since I do not partition the drives using disk utility, I create different partitions/ volumes through the raid controller. is it still slow down the performance of the HDDs.

so a set of HDDs will perform the best with a single array right?

is it safe enough if using JBOD for backup, or it is better to use raid 1? or is there a faster solution for backup an array? since JBOD & raid 1 are not fast tho.

Here's a couple of links that should help, including a copy of the utility itself.
Wiki page on TLER
RAID gets Revisited (TLER and the WDTLER utility)

WDTLER utility (.zip file download link I found)

This will be more difficult to accomplish on a Mac, but it's possible:
a. Use a USB floppy, and run a DOS boot disk with the WDTLER utility
b. Try the Ultimate Boot CD (contains the WDTLER utility IIRC) after you burn the .iso.

Personally, it seems like it'd be easier to put the drives in a PC or even a laptop via an eSATA card (laptop = PC BTW).


That's fine then.


The adapter I linked is meant to be installed in the system (MP). That in the enclosure is necessary, and cannot be avoided. But a unit in the MP can be, and is necessary when using SATA drives.

But if you're using the external port on the back of the RAID card to the enclosure, then you're fine.


I wouldn't do this.

The reason is, as you partition the drives, you're limiting the data to slower tracks. And if these arrays are accessed simultaneously, it will slow you down.

Either leave it as a single array (just use folders to file data), or get additional drives for separate arrays.

BTW: NEVER use the primary array to contain it's own backup. Use a separate drive. The reason is simple. If the array goes, you're backup is gone too, and then you're up #$%^'s creek without a paddle.

Also, RAID /= Backup. Not ever. You can use an array to backup another, but it's done via backup software. They must be independent of one another to do this.

Otherwise, just use a single drive, or a JBOD set (i.e. eSATA card + Port Mulitplier enclosure). JBOD is configured via Disk Utility. I wouldn't ever recommend using a stripe set (RAID 0) as a backup either, as it's just not safe enough - one drive goes, and the data is gone.

 

[nanofrog]

I will grab a desktop pretty quick tmr updating the HDDs with 7 second read & write, lets see if I still have the problem connecting the enclosure & the raid card. If it does not work,
I will try the other method you mention about, connecting the raid controller & the enclosure through the internal SFF-8087 to external SFF-8088 cable.

You won't need to use the internal to external cable, given what you've told me. External to external (card to enclosure, no adapters you added in the path).

umm, do you mean that if using SATA drive, it is necessary to avoid to use the converting adapter for a cleaner directly connection?

Yes, but "clean" doesn't mean pretty. It's to do with signal integrity for the data lines.

and is it possible to use it (the converting adapter) with SAS drives?[/COLOR]

Yes.

It because of the differenct voltages used for the data signals for the specifications (SAS and SATA aren't the same). SAS uses 20 Volts, while SATA only uses 600 milli Volts (which is why the cable lengths are much shorter, and you can't use adapters).

does it make a difference, since I do not partition the drives using disk utility, I create different partitions/ volumes through the raid controller. is it still slow down the performance of the HDDs.

No. Partitions set the track deliniations, no matter what utility was used to create them. So the start and end points (and every track inbtween) is fixed.

What this means is, once the data is stored on the inner tracks (50% or more of the overall capacity), it's throughputs are lower, and get worse the further in you go on the platter/s. Physics at work here (think of a vinyl record; starts at the outside, and moves in, so the track length per rotation decreases). That means there's less data read per rotation as you move inward.

Optical media is the reverse, as they start at the inside and move outward.

so a set of HDDs will perform the best with a single array right?

Generally speaking, yes, but only if the capacity is at the 50% mark or less. It's an important caveat that must be understood and obeyed for it to hold true.

There's a trick, that you can do for a fast array, which is to partition the outermost 10% or so of a disk. This is used for an OS partition for example.

If you do this, and want to use the remaining capacity in a manner that will access it at the same time (simultaneous access), you have to plan the system around simultaneous access, as the drives are shared. That's were member count comes in, as the parallelism increases throughput as well as capacity (you can even use smaller drives in such cases).

This is something I actually do, but I've 2 separate cards and arrays. Card 1 serves as both the OS (partition 1) and backup (partition 2) for the application and data array set on Card 2. This is one such instance a RAID can be used as a backup for another array (they're totally independent of one another, and the backup functions are handled by the backup software I have).

is it safe enough if using JBOD for backup, or it is better to use raid 1? or is there a faster solution for backup an array? since JBOD & raid 1 are not fast tho.[/COLOR]

Backups don't need to be fast, and JBOD is a good way to do it, as it's more cost effective (half the drive requirement vs. RAID 1).

Worst case in JBOD, if a drive dies, you only loose the data on that drive, not the entire set. But in backup, such a set isn't used in a high availability setting either (24/7), so the power management can spin those drives down (helps save wear and tear on the drives).

 

[Winglam]

Only one of my hard drive is able to turn the tler read & write, I believe the rest of them are locked. is there anything I can do with my HDDs, if not, what is the good candidate for a raid 0 array for temporary fast editing & rendering?

You won't need to use the internal to external cable, given what you've told me. External to external (card to enclosure, no adapters you added in the path).


Yes, but "clean" doesn't mean pretty. It's to do with signal integrity for the data lines.


Yes.

It because of the differenct voltages used for the data signals for the specifications (SAS and SATA aren't the same). SAS uses 20 Volts, while SATA only uses 600 milli Volts (which is why the cable lengths are much shorter, and you can't use adapters).


No. Partitions set the track deliniations, no matter what utility was used to create them. So the start and end points (and every track inbtween) is fixed.

What this means is, once the data is stored on the inner tracks (50% or more of the overall capacity), it's throughputs are lower, and get worse the further in you go on the platter/s. Physics at work here (think of a vinyl record; starts at the outside, and moves in, so the track length per rotation decreases). That means there's less data read per rotation as you move inward.

Optical media is the reverse, as they start at the inside and move outward.


Generally speaking, yes, but only if the capacity is at the 50% mark or less. It's an important caveat that must be understood and obeyed for it to hold true.

There's a trick, that you can do for a fast array, which is to partition the outermost 10% or so of a disk. This is used for an OS partition for example.

If you do this, and want to use the remaining capacity in a manner that will access it at the same time (simultaneous access), you have to plan the system around simultaneous access, as the drives are shared. That's were member count comes in, as the parallelism increases throughput as well as capacity (you can even use smaller drives in such cases).

This is something I actually do, but I've 2 separate cards and arrays. Card 1 serves as both the OS (partition 1) and backup (partition 2) for the application and data array set on Card 2. This is one such instance a RAID can be used as a backup for another array (they're totally independent of one another, and the backup functions are handled by the backup software I have).


Backups don't need to be fast, and JBOD is a good way to do it, as it's more cost effective (half the drive requirement vs. RAID 1).

Worst case in JBOD, if a drive dies, you only loose the data on that drive, not the entire set. But in backup, such a set isn't used in a high availability setting either (24/7), so the power management can spin those drives down (helps save wear and tear on the drives).

 

[nanofrog]

Only one of my hard drive is able to turn the tler read & write, I believe the rest of them are locked. is there anything I can do with my HDDs, if not, what is the good candidate for a raid 0 array for temporary fast editing & rendering?

Could you better explain this?
Where/How did you get the one drive to adjust?
(Might need to repeat it, even the port it was attached to if it was in the MP).

If it's a WD consumer model listed, it's possible to adjust the values. Other vendors have never released such a utility (Seagate, Hitachi, Samsung,...).

 

[Winglam]

3 x WD HDDs made on the Nov 09,
for these 3 drives, the tler is not able to detect the hard drives,
ppl mentioned in some forum, the WD HDDs made in the late 2009 is locked,
and no longer able to use the tler.

1 x WD HDDs made on the Jun 09 is no problem to adjust the -R -W

Could you better explain this?
Where/How did you get the one drive to adjust?
(Might need to repeat it, even the port it was attached to if it was in the MP).

If it's a WD consumer model listed, it's possible to adjust the values. Other vendors have never released such a utility (Seagate, Hitachi, Samsung,...).

 

[nanofrog]

3 x WD HDDs made on the Nov 09,
for these 3 drives, the tler is not able to detect the hard drives,
ppl mentioned in some forum, the WD HDDs made in the late 2009 is locked,
and no longer able to use the tler.

1 x WD HDDs made on the Jun 09 is no problem to adjust the -R -W

I haven't seen anything about them being locked, but I'm not surprised if WD's decided to do so, since the utility is out in the wild (they lose money by not selling the RAID Editions = RE lines).

With RAID, I usually use the REx lines. For a 1TB disk for example, I'd use the RE3 1TB (WD1002FBYS, and it's on the HDD Compatibility List). And it would be advisable to use these for all the members in the set.

Nor should you get them from the same place (avoids sequential serial numbers, in case of a bad batch).

You could transfer the Blacks to backup duty if you're stuck with them (JBOD would appear as a single logical disk).

 

[Winglam]

I was thinking to get the Samsung SpinPoint F1 HD103UJ,
since it is cheaper than re3 and fast. however,
the HHD Compatibility List claims that
HD103UJ is not compatible with 1680ix.

is there a big different between 32 cache & 16 cache?

since i have one HDD that is able to adjust the R & W,
is it possible to use it with the RE3 hard drives?

should I try the Seagate or Hitachi?

I haven't seen anything about them being locked, but I'm not surprised if WD's decided to do so, since the utility is out in the wild (they lose money by not selling the RAID Editions = RE lines).

With RAID, I usually use the REx lines. For a 1TB disk for example, I'd use the RE3 1TB (WD1002FBYS, and it's on the HDD Compatibility List). And it would be advisable to use these for all the members in the set.

Nor should you get them from the same place (avoids sequential serial numbers, in case of a bad batch).

You could transfer the Blacks to backup duty if you're stuck with them (JBOD would appear as a single logical disk).

 

[nanofrog]

I was thinking to get the Samsung SpinPoint F1 HD103UJ,
since it is cheaper than re3 and fast. however,
the HHD Compatibility List claims that
HD103UJ is not compatible with 1680ix.
how much for a re3 1tb?
is there a big different between 32 cache & 16 cache?
should I try the Seagate or Hitachi?

As a general rule, SAS controllers CANNOT deal with consumer drives due to the firmware timings. Which means enterprise drives must be used, and it needs to be listed on the HDD Compatibility List (this list really is your best friend).

Granted the HD103UJ is an enterprise unit, it's not going to work properly with that card (as it's been tested, and not working properly). This could change in the future (new firmware in either the card or drive). But not currently, and you'd be no better than you are now.

For drives not even listed, you're setting yourself up as a guinea pig (testing). If they work great. But if they don't, you're stuck dealing with returns (really sucks, and wastes time). Unfortunately, the latter is more common of an outcome as well.

That's why for the least hassle and quickest time to creation (followed by testing), stick with a known working drive on the HDD Compatibility List. Seriously. It will save you endless hours of aggravation, so please take this advice to heart and mind.

For SATA, I prefer WD right now, as Seagate burnt users with the ES.2 line that was out the same time as the 7200.11 series consumer models (which garnered most of the media attention; but there's something called the "Boot of Death" with the enterprise units of the same production period). Not a good thing, so I've not yet forgiven Seagate over that one.

Hitachi makes decent SAS drives, but they're substantially more expensive in terms of $/GB. I still deal with Seagate for SAS and FC drives (better than Hitachi too). Fujitsu (now Toshiba) makes the fastest worstation SAS drives.

But I've had bad luck with Samsung, Hitachi, and even Fujitsu for SATA (consumer models suck, so I don't expect much from enterprise units either, as they're very similar in terms of parts used, QC,...).

 

[Winglam]

I think I will get the WD RE3 1TB;
they have good performance.
Do you think that I can use the adjusted -R & -W drive black drive with the RE3?

does VelociRaptor consider a raid drive?
it has greater speed than the RE3 & RE4.

Does the cache make a huge difference?
the only 64MB cache hard drive I have is the WD 2TB green,
but I dont see there is a big different between 64MB cache & 32MB cache,

Thank you,

As a general rule, SAS controllers CANNOT deal with consumer drives due to the firmware timings. Which means enterprise drives must be used, and it needs to be listed on the HDD Compatibility List (this list really is your best friend).

Granted the HD103UJ is an enterprise unit, it's not going to work properly with that card (as it's been tested, and not working properly). This could change in the future (new firmware in either the card or drive). But not currently, and you'd be no better than you are now.

For drives not even listed, you're setting yourself up as a guinea pig (testing). If they work great. But if they don't, you're stuck dealing with returns (really sucks, and wastes time). Unfortunately, the latter is more common of an outcome as well.

That's why for the least hassle and quickest time to creation (followed by testing), stick with a known working drive on the HDD Compatibility List. Seriously. It will save you endless hours of aggravation, so please take this advice to heart and mind.

For SATA, I prefer WD right now, as Seagate burnt users with the ES.2 line that was out the same time as the 7200.11 series consumer models (which garnered most of the media attention; but there's something called the "Boot of Death" with the enterprise units of the same production period). Not a good thing, so I've not yet forgiven Seagate over that one.

Hitachi makes decent SAS drives, but they're substantially more expensive in terms of $/GB. I still deal with Seagate for SAS and FC drives (better than Hitachi too). Fujitsu (now Toshiba) makes the fastest worstation SAS drives.

But I've had bad luck with Samsung, Hitachi, and even Fujitsu for SATA (consumer models suck, so I don't expect much from enterprise units either, as they're very similar in terms of parts used, QC,...).

 

[nanofrog]

I think I will get the WD RE3 1TB;
they have good performance.
Do you think that I can use the adjusted -R & -W drive black drive with the RE3?

Technically, you could, but I wouldn't advise it. The Black variant doesn't have the additional sensors that the RE versions do, which assist in a RAID environment (i.e. fly height adjustment to prevent the heads from physically colliding with the platters in cases of high vibrations).

Consumer models can be used, but they'd need to be in isolation mounts of some kind (i.e. rubber grommets). Most enclosures aren't equiped with them, nor can handle them if you try to DIY, as the spacing is too narrow in the bays.

does VelociRaptor consider a raid drive?
it has greater speed than the RE3 & RE4.

Yes, the Velociraptor is actually an enterprise drive. But it's not faster than the newer 7200rpm drives, as they're using higher platter densities (i.e. 500GB/platter). The VR is older, and the platter density isn't as high. Even the Black can meet, if not just exceed it (slightly).

It does have an advantage in random access times, but if that's the performance needed, you'd be better served using SSD's. Enterprise grade are insanely expensive though, and the consumer models are really only suited as OS/application drives as the technology currently exists.

Does the cache make a huge difference?
the only 64MB cache hard drive I have is the WD 2TB green,
but I dont see there is a big different between 64MB cache & 32MB cache

Under certain circumstances, Yes. But as you go up, the performance gain isn't linear either. 32MB is fine. And BTW, there are the 2TB RE4 (WD2003FYYS; not the RE4-GP) that has 64MB as well. They're just hard to find right now, and prices show it (example).

 

[Winglam]

Gosh, the price is insane, it is a cost of my 4 x black.

anyhow, my blacks become a brick now...
should I save the drives, they are pretty new like 5 months old.

maybe I can setup an external JBOD with them,
do you think that I will be having a trouble connecting
the external JBOD (tr4x) to the raid controller using mini-SAS.

what is your recommendation for enclosure?
is Sans Digital's product good?
I read a forum couple day ago,
ppl highly recommend to use the enhance technology enclosure.

Technically, you could, but I wouldn't advise it. The Black variant doesn't have the additional sensors that the RE versions do, which assist in a RAID environment (i.e. fly height adjustment to prevent the heads from physically colliding with the platters in cases of high vibrations).

Consumer models can be used, but they'd need to be in isolation mounts of some kind (i.e. rubber grommets). Most enclosures aren't equiped with them, nor can handle them if you try to DIY, as the spacing is too narrow in the bays.


Yes, the Velociraptor is actually an enterprise drive. But it's not faster than the newer 7200rpm drives, as they're using higher platter densities (i.e. 500GB/platter). The VR is older, and the platter density isn't as high. Even the Black can meet, if not just exceed it (slightly).

It does have an advantage in random access times, but if that's the performance needed, you'd be better served using SSD's. Enterprise grade are insanely expensive though, and the consumer models are really only suited as OS/application drives as the technology currently exists.


Under certain circumstances, Yes. But as you go up, the performance gain isn't linear either. 32MB is fine. And BTW, there are the 2TB RE4 (WD2003FYYS; not the RE4-GP) that has 64MB as well. They're just hard to find right now, and prices show it (example).

 

[nanofrog]

Gosh, the price is insane, it is a cost of my 4 x black.

Enterprise versions are more expensive than their consumer counterparts. In the case of the RE4 2TB, the price is somewhat high due to the limited availablility.

anyhow, my blacks become a brick now...
should I save the drives, they are pretty new like 5 months old.

If they're truly bricks, then they're dead. If you can still access them via a single SATA port (i.e. logic board or SATA card), then they can still be used for something else, such as backups, or even sold off.

maybe I can setup an external JBOD with them,
do you think that I will be having a trouble connecting
the external JBOD (tr4x) to the raid controller using mini-SAS.

Yes and No. The RAID card can only use RAID or JBOD separately. What that means is, the card CANNOT do both at the same time (it's a setting in the firmware you can access via the web interface). [Ignoring the TLER value settings].

So to run those drives as a JBOD, you'd need to go with an eSATA card and a separate Port Mulitplier enclosure or attempt to run them internally.

what is your recommendation for enclosure?
is Sans Digital's product good?
I read a forum couple day ago,
ppl highly recommend to use the enhance technology enclosure.

I like Enhance myself (I like the idea of a locking door in an office environment - keeps someone that has no clue from pulling drives), but Sans Digital's gear would work. They're really similar (perhaps made in the same manufacturing facility).

 

[Winglam]

I have an eSATA card (highpoint rocket622) but it does not support pm...

Enterprise versions are more expensive than their consumer counterparts. In the case of the RE4 2TB, the price is somewhat high due to the limited availablility.


If they're truly bricks, then they're dead. If you can still access them via a single SATA port (i.e. logic board or SATA card), then they can still be used for something else, such as backups, or even sold off.


Yes and No. The RAID card can only use RAID or JBOD separately. What that means is, the card CANNOT do both at the same time (it's a setting in the firmware you can access via the web interface). [Ignoring the TLER value settings].

So to run those drives as a JBOD, you'd need to go with an eSATA card and a separate Port Mulitplier enclosure or attempt to run them internally.


I like Enhance myself (I like the idea of a locking door in an office environment - keeps someone that has no clue from pulling drives), but Sans Digital's gear would work. They're really similar (perhaps made in the same manufacturing facility).

 

[nanofrog]

I have an eSATA card (highpoint rocket622) but it does not support pm...

This one will, and it's really cheap too. Drivers can be found here. JBOD can be performed from Disk Utility.

 

[Winglam]

I have not received my 4 x WD RE3 hard drives yet,
so I dont have a chance to test them.

however, I tried the 2 second method that Nanofrog mentioned about
connecting the internal mini-SAS port directly to the raid enclosure SFF-8088 with my 4 x black drives. It is working & stable without enable tler!

as I remember, as Nanofrog mention the cable must be shorter than 1m
if using SATA drives in a external enclosure. however,
you dont usually connect the cable directly to the hard drive's backpanel;
in between the HD's backpanel, there are usually a converter that convert a SFF-8087 to SFF-8088. from the HD's backpanel to the converter; there are another few inches + 1 meter cable which has already exceed the maximum length of using SATA drives. I would like to know does it influence the connection?

This one will, and it's really cheap too. Drivers can be found here. JBOD can be performed from Disk Utility.

 

[nanofrog]

I have not received my 4 x WD RE3 hard drives yet,
so I dont have a chance to test them.

however, I tried the 2 second method that Nanofrog mentioned about
connecting the internal mini-SAS port directly to the raid enclosure SFF-8088 with my 4 x black drives. It is working & stable without enable tler!

as I remember, as Nanofrog mention the cable must be shorter than 1m
if using SATA drives in a external enclosure. however,
you dont usually connect the cable directly to the hard drive's backpanel;
in between the HD's backpanel, there are usually a converter that convert a SFF-8087 to SFF-8088. from the HD's backpanel to the converter; there are another few inches + 1 meter cable which has already exceed the maximum length of using SATA drives. I would like to know does it influence the connection?

Yes it does. The total cable length can actually go to ~ 1.25 - to even 1.5m total (includes all the cabling in the enclosure). But as you've discovered, sometimes it's too long, and the adapters degrade the signals as well. This is obviously over the specification, and the resistance (particularly contact), voltages, ... all matters as the the exact distance that can be achieved (it varies from setup to setup, but not that much, as it's already over spec. length).

So some enclosures can be better than others in this regard. Unfortunately, it's impossible to tell this from the spec sheets, as they don't indicate what the internal cable lengths or connections used internally between the backplane and SFF-8088 connectors on the back of the unit. I've seen a fair number of failures lately too (i.e. bad backplane boards OTB, cheap cables,...). Even bad PSU's.

It's really a crap shoot, until you find a brand that's fairly consistent, and why I gravitate towards Enhance for pedestal units (and they're not perfect either).

 

[Winglam]

by the way, with the 1 meter SFF-8088 to SFF-8088 cable, the tler of the hard drives must be enable. RE3s & blacks both work with my 1680ix raid controller.

without tler enabled hard drives. 1 meter cable would be failed/ timeout/ dropped; however, .5 meter SFF-8088 to SFF-8088 cable is workable with ARC-1680ix, it is stable on Mac Pro 2009 Snowleopard as well.

thinking to get the iStarUSA iAGE820ML2-5 Tower 8-bay Multilane SAS/SATA RAID enclosure, anyone has any idea? is it stable? is Multilane SFF=8407 faster than a mini-SAS SFF-8088? do I need to have a cable shorter than 1meter since I am using RE3.



QUOTE=nanofrog;9588066]Yes it does. The total cable length can actually go to ~ 1.25 - to even 1.5m total (includes all the cabling in the enclosure). But as you've discovered, sometimes it's too long, and the adapters degrade the signals as well. This is obviously over the specification, and the resistance (particularly contact), voltages, ... all matters as the the exact distance that can be achieved (it varies from setup to setup, but not that much, as it's already over spec. length).

So some enclosures can be better than others in this regard. Unfortunately, it's impossible to tell this from the spec sheets, as they don't indicate what the internal cable lengths or connections used internally between the backplane and SFF-8088 connectors on the back of the unit. I've seen a fair number of failures lately too (i.e. bad backplane boards OTB, cheap cables,...). Even bad PSU's.

It's really a crap shoot, until you find a brand that's fairly consistent, and why I gravitate towards Enhance for pedestal units (and they're not perfect either).[/QUOTE]

 

[nanofrog]

by the way, with the 1 meter SFF-8088 to SFF-8088 cable, the tler of the hard drives must be enable. RE3s & blacks both work with my 1680ix raid controller.

without tler enabled hard drives. 1 meter cable would be failed/ timeout/ dropped; however, .5 meter SFF-8088 to SFF-8088 cable is workable with ARC-1680ix, it is stable on Mac Pro 2009 Snowleopard as well.

TLER is typically required, not to mention advisable with consumer SATA models.

The shorter cable length did help you, but it could easily be unstable (you may have to leave it running awhile to notice while testing; read & write using a test pool setup in a loop). I'm not sure about OS X tools that can do this (set a loop to get a run time), but there are under other OS's (and at least have free trials, if not free in some cases).

thinking to get the iStarUSA iAGE820ML2-5 Tower 8-bay Multilane SAS/SATA RAID enclosure, anyone has any idea? is it stable? is Multilane SFF=8407 faster than a mini-SAS SFF-8088? do I need to have a cable shorter than 1meter since I am using RE3.

I've not used that one often enough to be sure, but it's basic. Others I work with have had mixed results, but that's happened with other known brands as well (my instincts tell me that Enhance, Sans Digital's and iStar's products are coming out of the same manufacturing facility in China; if not, the design internally is extremely similar and made with the same QC levels = all over the place).

That said, I looked up that unit's pricing, and it's more expensive than the Enhance or Sans Digitals (example of Enhance - this one is black, but they do make it in silver). I use Directron a lot, and it's a good place to get gear from.

The Sans Digital TR8X is the cheapest one yet (here; silver).

As per the connector, stick with SFF-8088. It's a faster rated connector, and the locking mechanism doesn't require a screwdriver, unlike SFF-8470.

Stick with 1.0m cables for the RE3's. Shorter makes placement harder, and longer will be unstable.