TerraMaster Official Forum

Hi,

It looks like one on my HD just died...or at least my NAS has identification problems with it.

So far my NAS (see config in signature) was running fine with those 2 identical drives.

However, looking at Hard Drive view, both are reported GOOD, albeit disk size of second is VERY suspect (I know for good disk 2 is 2TB, same model as Disk 1)

Looking for SMART info for each: See: empty SMART info on DISK 2; identity completely erroneous.
How is that TOS does not determine Disk2 is problematic, and flag it as such in initial Hard Drive view?

Please advise which RAID did you create for your two HDDs? Is there any words showing that hard drive is missing at Storage pool?

RAID1, btrfs, and yes system does report one missing drive (not saying which BTW).

As I'm looking for replacement, I do not see Toshiba P300 3To in recommended list yet (is CMR): any hint?

It's not in the list if you don't find it there. Barracuda is not a recommended HDD model too.

Yes I knew about Barracuda Green, and they are on their way-out of my NAS now.

Toshiba P300 0.5 to 3TB (CMR DT01ACAxxx series, not 4-6TB that are SMR) are quite affordable, good performance & reliable drives, and are known to be supported by top competitors NAS markers.
What does it take to reference them into TerraMaster supported Drive database?

As we did not test them yet, we will do it in near future and add them to list if they are compatible.

TMroy wrote: ↑23 Aug 2020, 22:54we will do it in near future and add them to list if they are compatible.

Thanks for consideration, please keep me posted.

BTW, I noticed current recommended drive list includes (non-pro) WD Red SMR drives (EFAX reference), which is quite surprising in terms of performance for NAS usage...
Though they may be compatible for such usage, it seems quite unexpected to recommend such drives as SMR may have big performance hits.

The WD red SMR drives passed our testing with no issue, and they are officially offered from WD as NAS drives. Before WD take further action on these drives, we will remain current list unchanged.

Sure they work ok (so are compatible), and can keep data safe.

But, if you want to keep good write performance, even when drives become occupied, you'd avoid SMR-based drive! (there's a class-actions going-on on that matter...).

They are OK for Archiving, but not to recommend for heavy write operations, such as in RAID service.
You may want to have compatible and recommend category, or add note to such devices.
(note: S*** has for instance removed some SMR such as WD20EFAX, WD60EFAX, even if marketed as NAS drives!)

additional note: last June, WD felt forced to make some clarifying statement on Red lineup with EFRX (CMR) /EFAX (SMR) reference for all WD20/WD30/WD40/WD60 devices...