The company started using SSDs in 2018 but added most of the drives in the table below within the past three years. So while these aren't apples-to-apples comparisons of SSD models, the table provides a broad glimpse at SSD reliability that the average person can't replicate on their own.īackblaze's blog provides several tables depicting SSD failure rates, but this one looks at AFRs across the entire time Backblaze has used SSDs. Some drives have seen way more active use than others, with active days ranging from 104 days up to 724,240. Backblaze said all SSDs analyzed have "similar" workloads.īefore we get into Backblaze's first table, which depicts annualized failure rates (AFRs) for 13 different SSDs models, it's important to note the limited sample size of 2,906 drives and differing number of drives for each model. As detailed by Backblaze's blog post, the company uses SSDs for booting storage servers, as well as reading, writing, and deleting log and temporary files made by said storage servers. Looking at the 2,906 SSDs in its possession, the company tracked the failure rates of mostly consumer-grade SSDs, which it started using as boot drives at the start of Q4 2018.īackblaze has long shared data on the reliability of hard disk drives (HDDs), but this latest report provides fresh perspective on HDDs' speedier, pricier cousins. Backblaze, a San Mateo, California-based backup and cloud storage firm, on Thursday shared data giving us a unique look at the reliability of SSDs over up to four years of use.
0 kommentar(er)
