Selfhosted

40337 readers

498 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz

What's the difference between a $50 HDD and a $200 HDD? (lemmy.world)

submitted 3 months ago by gedaliyah@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Beginner question: Searching for my first dedicated server setup, and I have no idea what to look for in a hard drive. I see a huge difference between drives of the same capacity, so what makes the difference? I am looking to eventually have a media server that can run "-arr" programs, Jellyfin, Immich, sync music, books, etc.

What are the factors I should be paying attention to other than capacity? Is it a lot of branding and smoke and mirrors, or will I see a significant change in performance/reliability with different drives?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Backblaze regularly releases failure rate statistics of their drives, and it's often a big enough dataset to be quite meaningful. I haven't been keeping up with it lately, but there certainly was a period of time where there were substantial differences in the failure rates of different manufacturers.

So while you do still need to have drive failure mitigation strategies, buying more reliable devices can definitely save you time and headache in the future by having to deal with failures less frequently.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's impossible to tell how meaningful Backblaze's numbers are because we don't know the global failure rate for each model they test, so we can't calculate the statistical significance. Also there are other factors involved like the age of the drives and the type of workload they were used for.

buying more reliable devices can definitely save you time and headache in the future by having to deal with failures less frequently.

That's a recipe for sorrow. Don't waste time on "reliability" research, just plan for failure. All HDDs fail. Assume they will and backup or replicate your data.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

All SSDs will die too. Not saying you meant or implied that they wouldn't, just clarifying for anyone who may not be aware. You're spot on with "plan for failure".