[smartmontools-support] Inconsistent long test times

[Kent Watsen]

>> > Is this level of variability normal?
>> > Should I return all the WD drives?
>> 
>> You can register your purchased WD drives at Western Digital  (https://support-en.wd.com/app/account/dashboard <https://support-en.wd.com/app/account/dashboard>).
>> When done, you can open a support case whether or not this is to be expected. And ask for the reasons. 
> 
> Good idea - done!  (Hopefully not a new spam vector)
> 
> 
>> And then share with us please ;-)
> 
> Will do!


My first response from WD was:

I really apologize for the delayed response. Upon discussing this case with the senior team, they wanted you to run diagnostics using data lifeguard software. If you still unhappy with the drives then we can get it replaced.

However, after pointing out that I don’t have a Windows or Mac computer to test against and also that the question isn’t whether the drives are functioning properly, but *why* the SMART test times vary so wildly for drives having the same model-number, and if these test-time numbers are normal, the response I received was:

Thank you for your continued response. We can only comment on the behalf of our tools and our tools (Windows data life guard diagnostics) only run on windows and we do not have any information about Solaris. 

That said, using `fio` to test the performance of the various drives, I found that both the WD20SPZX drives outperformed the ST2000LM015.  The results below only show the “write” test results because the ZFS L2ARC cache validates the “read” values.  Note that, in all cases, the ZFS pool contains just the single drive.


	• For a Seagate Barracuda (ST2000LM015) drive, which had a 330 minute long-test wait time:
		• 4k
			• Random write: IOPS=24, BW=97.6KiB/s (99.9kB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=21, BW=85.2KiB/s (87.2kB/s)
		• 64k:
			• Random write: IOPS=12, BW=785KiB/s (804kB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=12, BW=788KiB/s (807kB/s)
		• 1m:
			• Random write: IOPS=9, BW=9439KiB/s (9665kB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=9, BW=9930KiB/s (10.2MB/s)

	• For a WD Blue (WDC WD20SPZX-75U Revision: 6712) drive, which had a 737 minute long-test wait time:
		• 4k
			• Random write: IOPS=33, BW=136KiB/s (139kB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=34, BW=137KiB/s (140kB/s)
		• 64k:
			• Random write: IOPS=34, BW=2207KiB/s (2260kB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=34, BW=2215KiB/s (2268kB/s)
		• 1m:
			• Random write: IOPS=34, BW=34.5MiB/s (36.1MB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=35, BW=35.6MiB/s (37.3MB/s)

	• For a WD Blue (WD20SPZX-22U Revision: 1A01) drive, which had a 119 minute long-test wait time:

		• 4k
			• Random write: IOPS=34, BW=138KiB/s (141kB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=35, BW=141KiB/s (145kB/s)
		• 64k:
			• Random write: IOPS=35, BW=2248KiB/s (2302kB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=34, BW=2191KiB/s (2243kB/s)
		• 1m:
			• Random write: IOPS=34, BW=34.4MiB/s (36.1MB/s)
			• Sequential write: IOPS=35, BW=35.4MiB/s (37.1MB/s)


These results muddy any coarse of action.  Perhaps the WD20SPZX-22U drives (from NewEgg) are best, having both better performance and smaller “long-test” wait times.  If I could do it over again, I might buy all 10 drives from NewEgg in 5 separate orders (containing two drives each) spaced a few days apart.  But, as it stands, I’ll just hold onto what I got and live with the crazy-long test times on the WD20SPZX-75U drives.

Thanks all for your comments.

Kent



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://listi.jpberlin.de/pipermail/smartmontools-support/attachments/20210312/48fb2e9e/attachment.htm>