WD unveils new high-capacity 32TB SMR and 26TB CMR disk drives

My Jellyfin just quivered…
- 😏

I’ve been looking to buy a couple 24TB drives. Hopefully, this pushes their price down.
- Peertube instance owners rejoice!
  
  Or just people who download porn.

When will it be commercially available though? Supposedly Seagate has had 30TB drives out for the better part of a year, but I can't find anything larger than 24TB actually available for purchase.
- I've been waiting for a 32TB to become available as well, Seagate announced that drive last year and it's still not available outside data centers. I suspect the WD one will be the same.
- I'd guess that they're commercially available but only for hyperscalers - large companies like Google, Amazon (AWS), etc that need a huge amount of storage.

Obligatory hint that SMR isn't suited for RAID systems.
- A better way to word it is: SMR is only suited for archival usage. Large writes, little-to-no random writes.
  
  I wonder how the read performance would be.
- Tape on a platter, basically.
- Wonder what happens if you throw them in an unraid BTRFS/jbod configuration with a CMR parity drive.
  
  Slowdown and data corruption?

Assuming that these have fairly impressive 100 MB/s sustained write speed, then it's going to take about 93 hours to write the whole contents of the disk - basically four days. That's a long time to replace a failed drive in a RAID array; you'd need to consider multiple disks of redundancy just in case another one fails while you're resilvering the first.
- This is one of the reasons I use unRAID with two parity disks. If one fails, I'll still have access to my data while I rebuild the data on the replacement drive.
  Although, parity checks with these would take forever, of course..
- That's a pretty common failure scenario in SANs. If you buy a bunch of drives, they're almost guaranteed to come from the same batch, meaning they're likely to fail around the same time. The extra load of a rebuild can kill drives that are already close to failure.
  Which is why SANs have hot spares that can be allocated instantly on failure. And you should use a RAID level with enough redundancy to meet your reliability needs. And RAID is not backup, you should have backups too.
  
  Also why you need to schedule periodical parity scrubs, then the "extra load of a rebuild" is exercised regularly so weak drives will be found long before a rebuild is needed.
- My 16TB ultrastars get upwards of 180MB/s sustained read and write, these will presumably be faster than that as the density is higher.
  
  I'm guessing that only works if the file is smaller than the RAM cache of the drives. Transfer a file that's bigger than that, and it will go fast at first, but then fill the cache and the rate starts to drop closer to 100 MB/s.
  My data hoarder drives are a pair of WD ultrastar 18TB SAS drives on RAID1, and that's how they tend to behave.
- 2 parity is standard and should still be adequate. Likelihood of two failures within four days on the same array is small.
  
  It's more likely if you bought all the drives from the same store (since that increases the likelihood that they're from the same batch), so you should make sure that you buy them from different stores.
- Except these drives are SMR - not something you'd want in a RAID.
  
  Title literally says SMR for one size and CMR for another. Not that I should expect much from a .ml account.

If you eyeballing these, please remind that these babies tend to be LOUD AS FUCK, so might not be suitable for home server use.
- Are they any louder than any HDD from the last 30 years?
  If so, im actually curious why that is
  Edit: fixed to say HDD not SSD
  
  Well I have no experience with these particular drives, but they do seem to have 11 platters. Which is beyond insane as far as I'm concerned. More platters means more moving parts, more friction more noise (all other things being equal).
  
  Oops, yes. I definitely would expect these to be much louder than your 6 GB 1998 model HDD wrangling under stress of copying files at 30 MB/s.
  
  My NAS uses a pair of SAS drives, and they make noises at boot up that would be concerning in a desktop. They're quite obnoxious. But I keep them in part of the house where they don't bother me.
- Just don't put it in your bedroom. All those dead skin cells wouldn't do good to it anyway.
  
  Since when is dust a concern for hard drives??
- I've found that the only thing you can hear through a closed basement door are noisy high speed fans, e.g. from used 19" servers, disks produce much less noise.
  
  Comparatively, yes - that’s auditory masking for you. On a relatively quiet place like a home, these will sound like rats running wild in your pipes.

Parity rebuild will only take a week....
- A week before next month

My 6TB drive just died. So I'm in the market for a new one.
- sorry but these aren't 6TB
  
  Mebbe the 26 one is just 3-4 smaller drives inside it?

Archive link: https://archive.ph/CAxE9

- Damn, how are you so confident?
  
  Nobody will remember or care if he's wrong.

Think of the parity!

There is already a samsung 8 Tb SSD being sold on amazon. Buying 4 of those will be far cheaper than this monstrosity. And it will be silent, and actually useful as a home server, much faster too.
- No shot 4 SSDs will be the same price as a HDD of the same capacity yet. HDD is still the king of GB/$.
  If I'm wrong... Can you send me some links? I could use some cheap 8TB SSDs.
  
  Aliexpress/cheap-fake-ssd-16TB 80€
  Jk
  I trust ali with a lot, but not drives :-)
- Nah I don't believe you at all.
  SAMSUNG 870 QVO SATA 8TB = $683.38 x 4 = $2,733.52
  8TB x 4 = 32TB
  $2,733.52 / 32TB = $85.4225/TB
  Yeah one of these disks does not cost more than $25/TB.
  26TB x $25 = $650
  
  FWIW in July last year Amazon was selling these as low as $320. My biggest fear of a 26 TB HDD is getting all 26 TB of data off of it if I needed it without the drive dying.
  
  QVO drives are trash though. Would not recommend. Very slow and they don't last as long as Samsung's EVO and PRO drives.