[smartmontools-support] Inconsistent long test times

[Vedant Lath]

ST2000LM015 is an SMR drive while WD20SPZX is a CMR drive - that explains
the large IOPS differences.

On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 2:44 AM Kent Watsen <kent+smartmontools at watsen.net>
wrote:

>
> > 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).
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Smartmontools-support mailing list
> Smartmontools-support at listi.jpberlin.de
> https://listi.jpberlin.de/mailman/listinfo/smartmontools-support
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://listi.jpberlin.de/pipermail/smartmontools-support/attachments/20210313/9642fbac/attachment.htm>