Lifespan of External Hard drives
Nov 24, 2020 08:04:37 #
In-lightened wrote:
I keep my LR catalog on externals and have 2 or 3 backups. At this point, I have one that has lasted 5 years. The others failed in the range of 2 to 4 years. A few months back I had 2 fail in a week. This prompted the extra backup. Ive' used WD and Seagate. My images on Flikr are what my daughter said she would like to have when I am gone. I guess that is the ultimate failure backup.
Yes, and they keep doubling their prices every year! Funny, my 49 year old daughter said the same thing.
Nov 24, 2020 08:59:02 #
dbfalconer wrote:
A speaker at a recent photo club meeting was describing the importance various redundant backup options. He mentioned that external hard drives (like Seagate and WD) need to be replaced about every 18-24 months.
I understand any such device can fail, and one needs a backup of the backup, so to speak. But I was shocked at his assertion. I keep adding more WD units as my collection grows...but I had not considered constant replacement too. Thoughts? Thanks.
I understand any such device can fail, and one needs a backup of the backup, so to speak. But I was shocked at his assertion. I keep adding more WD units as my collection grows...but I had not considered constant replacement too. Thoughts? Thanks.
With 30 years experience in IT, of which 10 years were dedicated to repair/replacement..the older drives would definitely go out in 1-2 years,(circuit boards were a big culprit. With new technology, that does not hold true The last computer I bought still has the old style rotating disk and is about 8 years old. My external drives are 4-5 years old. I have started to migrate to the Solid State external drives as they last even longer & have a faster response
Nov 24, 2020 09:07:41 #
insman1132 wrote:
I would think how often you access a drive would have a lot to do with its longevity.
I think you are right. I am in the habit of not turning my computer off for a couple of weeks at a time and I never let it go to sleep. Two had drive failures after 5 years. The most recent is my current Mac desktop. I had a complete backup, and I had the Apple Store replace the drive so nothing serious happened. I suppose if the Mac had spent more of the last five years powered down I would not have had that problem.
By the way, the Mac is now acting a bit hinky! Some software is acting in strange ways. I'll hold out to see if Apple puts their new chip in the Macs and then i'll take this one in for a trade-in.
Nov 24, 2020 09:17:43 #
Yes, you can replace your drives every year, and you can also buy a new car every year. I buy HGST Ultrastar 4TB drives, refurbished, and they just keep going and going. I have other drives that are over five years old, and they are working fine. As everyone knows, one backup drive is not sufficient, so the newer drives are "assisted" by older drives. Being portable, I can move them from one machine to another. I think I have two old drives in the garage that failed, but no more than two.
I backup to two "newish" drives and a NAS. Then I have the older drives for redundancy. I recently got a MediaOne box, and I put four drives into that. Very convenient.
I backup to two "newish" drives and a NAS. Then I have the older drives for redundancy. I recently got a MediaOne box, and I put four drives into that. Very convenient.
Nov 24, 2020 09:30:39 #
dbfalconer wrote:
A speaker at a recent photo club meeting was describing the importance various redundant backup options. He mentioned that external hard drives (like Seagate and WD) need to be replaced about every 18-24 months.
I understand any such device can fail, and one needs a backup of the backup, so to speak. But I was shocked at his assertion. I keep adding more WD units as my collection grows...but I had not considered constant replacement too. Thoughts? Thanks.
I understand any such device can fail, and one needs a backup of the backup, so to speak. But I was shocked at his assertion. I keep adding more WD units as my collection grows...but I had not considered constant replacement too. Thoughts? Thanks.
His replacement assertion must assume that the external drives are powered up all the time and regular HDD's are spinning. There is no way that unpowered drives should fail after 18-24 months.
Nov 24, 2020 09:34:28 #
I have not had the same good fortune with hard drive longevity... have used WD Passport and good for 2-3 years max. ☹️
Nov 24, 2020 09:54:03 #
dbfalconer wrote:
A speaker at a recent photo club meeting was describing the importance various redundant backup options. He mentioned that external hard drives (like Seagate and WD) need to be replaced about every 18-24 months.
I understand any such device can fail, and one needs a backup of the backup, so to speak. But I was shocked at his assertion. I keep adding more WD units as my collection grows...but I had not considered constant replacement too. Thoughts? Thanks.
I understand any such device can fail, and one needs a backup of the backup, so to speak. But I was shocked at his assertion. I keep adding more WD units as my collection grows...but I had not considered constant replacement too. Thoughts? Thanks.
They can fail, but I've never had one fail. I just threw away 4 old external WD and Seagate drives that were taking up space in my safe. They were old 1TB drives with backups of all my pictures. For what I paid for one, I was able to buy an 8TB drive. So I have to 8TB drives now. One for storage of my photos, and one for backups....
Nov 24, 2020 09:54:16 #
Gene51 wrote:
Statistics are a funny thing. There will be many w... (show quote)
👍👍 Accurate information and good advice.
Nov 24, 2020 10:06:01 #
RSQRD
Loc: SW Florida
experience does not bode well for WD I have had 3 my book DUO in the last 2 yrs. WD has replaced the units each time I can not recommend them
Nov 24, 2020 10:08:54 #
Picture Taker
Loc: Michigan Thumb
Back up in my opinion must be two separate hard drives, I learned this from experience over 10 years ago when I lost my pictures, They wanted I believe $1,000.00 to try and about 10% chance to recover.
I also found that you SHOULD NOT use a solid stat drive for storage as they fail without warning and a 0% chance of recovery (I was told this by a sr. manager of a high tech computer company. They love them as working drives but won't keep data stored on them)
I may be over cautious, but, about a week ago one of my 2 backup drives (only about a year or so old, started to have a problem so I just replaced it.
I also found that you SHOULD NOT use a solid stat drive for storage as they fail without warning and a 0% chance of recovery (I was told this by a sr. manager of a high tech computer company. They love them as working drives but won't keep data stored on them)
I may be over cautious, but, about a week ago one of my 2 backup drives (only about a year or so old, started to have a problem so I just replaced it.
Nov 24, 2020 10:39:29 #
The HDs you name have moving parts which are prone to failing, especially the reader/writer arm. A few years ago, when their prices started coming down, I started using SSD memory units.
Nov 24, 2020 10:41:17 #
Learning from long experience, I estimate the mean time to failure for WD and Seagate HDDs used for photo back up at about 36 months. Using the industrial maintenance standard for replacement at 1/2 MTF gives 18 months. I have switched to SSDs but still using this replacement schedule.
Neal
Neal
Nov 24, 2020 10:42:50 #
Picture Taker wrote:
Back up in my opinion must be two separate hard dr... (show quote)
Regrading the lack of recovery possibility of recovering data from a failed SSD, I have the following comments:
1) As you point out from your failed drive experience, data is seldom recovered from HDs either. If it’s a bad controller card, then the recovery company will need a controller board from the same model drive. If the motor is bad, the likelihood of successfully swapping it is very low, and if the platter is damaged, then it’s even more unlikely that any recovery will succeed. And finally, the cost is so high and the probability of recovery is so low, that virtually no one does it. Your best hope is if the drive won’t spin up - sometimes cycling the power will start it, and if ALL else fails, a slap with the palm of your hand on the top of the drive MAY start it spinning long enough to copy off the data (if the shock doesn’t crash the head into the platter) - a LAST resort if it won’t spin up.
2) this is the original argument, emanating from HD manufacturers when SSDs were introduced. The fact is that SSDs very rarely fail. They do, but not often - I have 8 Intel’s that have lasted 5-7 years (so far) without a failure.
3) it is true that you MIGHT be able to detect a failing HD by monitoring the SMART data from the drive if you use a monitoring ap.
4) it shouldn’t be more than an inconvenience because you should have a local backup and an off-site DR copy. The only reason not to use SSDs these days is if you have many TBs of data and the cost is prohibitive. HDs have had a great run from the early 10 MB consumer drives to the 10 TB drives of today, but their performance has been stagnant for a decade, and with SSDs doubling in capacity for the same price every 1 to 1-1/2 yers, the end is in sight except for the largest storage pools.
Nov 24, 2020 10:46:54 #
Nov 24, 2020 10:52:38 #
That’s crazy. I too have a few WD and LaCie 2tb drives, which are many for different subjects, and the “newest” is from 2014. In addition, I have 4 or 6tb LaCie that backs everything, which I acquired in 2008. Plus bonus, LaCie still supports the older one. No problems
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.