Jump to content

  • Log in with Twitter Log in with Windows Live Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Photo

Feeder disk: WD black or SSD?


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 DrParis

DrParis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44 posts
  • LocationFrance

Posted 10 February 2014 - 10:03 AM

Hi there,

 

My feeder disk is tired, time for replacement.

I was wondering if any of you were using an SSD as "landing zone".

I was told that SSD are not designed for lots of write operations (typical for a landing zone / feeder), so what do you think? Do you have usage feedback about this?

 

So ultimately, what do you recommend as new feeder disk?


  • Tardas-Zib likes this

#2 Christopher (Drashna)

Christopher (Drashna)

    Customer and Technical Support

  • Administrators
  • 8,394 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA, USA

Posted 10 February 2014 - 06:24 PM

I don't use a feeder disk for my pool, actually.

 

However, if I were to set one up, I'd use an SSD or two.

But yes, lots of writes "thrash" the disk and reduce it's lifespan. However, the more modern SSDs are more tolerante of this but still experience it to a degree. However, if you have Scanner installed and the drive does report it's "health", then you should have warning when to replace it.


Christopher Courtney

aka "Drashna"

Microsoft MVP for Windows Home Server 2009-2012

Lead Moderator for We Got Served

Moderator for Home Server Show

 

This is my server

 

Lots of "Other" data on your pool? Read about what it is here.


#3 DrParis

DrParis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44 posts
  • LocationFrance

Posted 10 February 2014 - 06:25 PM

Hi Drashna ;)

 

Yes I have scanner installed... but even if I know when to change the disk I would not like to do that every year ;)



#4 Christopher (Drashna)

Christopher (Drashna)

    Customer and Technical Support

  • Administrators
  • 8,394 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA, USA

Posted 10 February 2014 - 06:33 PM

Shouldn't be that often, but yeah, I hear you.


Christopher Courtney

aka "Drashna"

Microsoft MVP for Windows Home Server 2009-2012

Lead Moderator for We Got Served

Moderator for Home Server Show

 

This is my server

 

Lots of "Other" data on your pool? Read about what it is here.


#5 JazJon

JazJon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts

Posted 16 February 2014 - 05:06 AM

I never tried the whole "feeder disk" option yet.   I have access to a SSD drive.  Is it worth trying out?  I have a free SATA port.



#6 Christopher (Drashna)

Christopher (Drashna)

    Customer and Technical Support

  • Administrators
  • 8,394 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA, USA

Posted 16 February 2014 - 06:04 AM

It depends. If you do a lot of WRITES, or the write speed is critical to you, then the feeder disk is a great option.

 

However, if it's not important to you, then ... well it may not be worth it. 

 

Just remember, if you use a SSD, it will get thrashed. Also, you'll want two feeder disks if you're using duplication.


Christopher Courtney

aka "Drashna"

Microsoft MVP for Windows Home Server 2009-2012

Lead Moderator for We Got Served

Moderator for Home Server Show

 

This is my server

 

Lots of "Other" data on your pool? Read about what it is here.


#7 gtechwi

gtechwi

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 04 March 2014 - 04:37 PM

Hope it's OK to jump in here, feel free to move to new thread if needed. I couldn't find the answer on the forum.

 

I'm wondering about using a feeder disk on a PC, with DrivePool installed. I'm trying to figure out how to cut my write time. I work with large CAD files, and do a TON of writes, average files ~10mb, some larger, and am tired of waiting while the file writes before I can continue working, it's only a second or so, but with the new tech, should be almost instantaneous.

 

I don't feel like spending for a large SSD to hold all of my files, and am wondering about using a couple of HDD's in a pool with a small SSD feeder disk to allow for uninterrupted work when doing a lot of file writes. Using a small SSD will make for inexpensive replacement if it wears out.

 

Will this work as a substitute for a large SSD as a solution to cut file write times on my desktop workstation?

 

I have heard of using a RAM disk, but would 'prefer' using the DrivePool with SSD feeder disk.


Edited by gtechwi, 04 March 2014 - 05:06 PM.


#8 DrParis

DrParis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44 posts
  • LocationFrance

Posted 04 March 2014 - 05:08 PM

Hi gtechwi.

 

In my humble opinion, I doubt it would work.

From my understanding the feeder disk is only used for new files placements, not files modifications (which in your case seems to be the case).

 

Isn't file write caching working fine for you?

Or purhaps working on a ramdisk that is automatically synchronized to HDD in the background (my motherboard comes with a software to do that).

But this to be only considered if your computer is plugged into a UPS.



#9 gtechwi

gtechwi

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 04 March 2014 - 05:45 PM

DrParis, file write caching has always been a problem with this machine. you are correct, file modification write speed is what I'm after. I've played with the page file settings, etc, but am not getting the performance I would like. It is an HP wx8400 workstation, quad Xeon 3.00GHz, 16GB RAM.

 

Should be able to make this thing fly...at least faster than it is...

 

I have never done ramdisk, so this is new to me. Yes the PC is on a UPS.



#10 Christopher (Drashna)

Christopher (Drashna)

    Customer and Technical Support

  • Administrators
  • 8,394 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA, USA

Posted 04 March 2014 - 08:06 PM

gtechwi, have you used the "fsutil" hack to increase the memory sized used for file operations?

If not, that may help performance for you:

http://technet.micro...y/cc785435.aspx

the specific command being "fsutil behavior set memoryusage 2"

 

Also, are you using the most up to date drivers for the controller?

 

But DrParis is right, this wouldn't help as much with modifying, unless the files are left on the SSD/faster drive. In which case, as seperate pool may be a good idea here.


Christopher Courtney

aka "Drashna"

Microsoft MVP for Windows Home Server 2009-2012

Lead Moderator for We Got Served

Moderator for Home Server Show

 

This is my server

 

Lots of "Other" data on your pool? Read about what it is here.


#11 gtechwi

gtechwi

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 04 March 2014 - 08:27 PM

OK, that settles it for me, we are getting new SSD's! :lol:

 

I was already going to upgrade the OS drive, but undecided for the data. My current OS drive is a WD Blue, and has gotten rather pathetically slow
(or always has been).

 

I could get a little better performance from a better HDD, but at this point, I will go SSD's all around, for the OS and data drives. I have to get faster file modification write times. This will be the simplest route for me.

 

Thank you drashna and DrParis for helping make up my mind, I appreciate the help.



#12 Christopher (Drashna)

Christopher (Drashna)

    Customer and Technical Support

  • Administrators
  • 8,394 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA, USA

Posted 05 March 2014 - 06:00 PM

lol, 

 

And yeah, I can't really go back to "spinners" for the system disk. The speed different is just too obvious.

 

And just remember, if you're using feeder disks, you may not see a great increase on modification times, depending on where the files are.


Christopher Courtney

aka "Drashna"

Microsoft MVP for Windows Home Server 2009-2012

Lead Moderator for We Got Served

Moderator for Home Server Show

 

This is my server

 

Lots of "Other" data on your pool? Read about what it is here.


#13 aprib

aprib

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 01:55 PM

Hi there,

 

My feeder disk is tired, time for replacement.

I was wondering if any of you were using an SSD as "landing zone".

I was told that SSD are not designed for lots of write operations (typical for a landing zone / feeder), so what do you think? Do you have usage feedback about this?

 

So ultimately, what do you recommend as new feeder disk?

 

 

If you're curious about SSD lifetimes, I wrote this in an older post on another forum.

 

--------

 

For those wondering on lifetimes. Assuming 1000 write cycles, I am now on my 7th cycle (Item AD on crystal disk info. Each SSD manufacturer implements this differently, it may not be item AD on yours).

 
Crystal disk info reports 4554 power-on hours. At 15 hours a day, translates to 300 days of usage (and in fact correlates to the purchase date in Sept 2012). So if 300 days is 7 cycles, then 1000 cycles is 42857 days or 117 years. I am not a video or graphics professional and my games are on a HDD, so my SSD usage is mostly office work. Your mileage may vary.
 
In fact the rated write cycle of a regular mlc ssd is 3000 cycles, so with my pattern of usage, the ssd will last 350 years.
 
rOeUIud.jpg

 

-----

 

Here is another interesting read:

 

They tested to the death a samsung TLC rated at 1000 write cycles. In summary they died at around 3000 write cycles, 3x what samsung claims.

 

http://us.hardware.i...inal-conclusion

 

 

 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users