171
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by Sunny@slrpnk.net to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

Been finding some good deals on 2.5 disks lately, but have never bought one before. Have a couple of 3.5 disks on the other hand in my Unraid server. Wondering how much it matters wether I get a 2.5 or not? What form factor do you prefer/usually go for?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 27 points 6 months ago

The key here is “better performance at similar price points”. There are absolutely amazing 2.5 drives made for server applications, but they cost so much money you’re better off getting SSD these days.

Speaking of which, you should consider SSD.

[-] subtext@lemmy.world 39 points 6 months ago

Absolutely no shot I can afford 40 TB of SSDs for my NAS

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

Man, I remember when Zip Disks were a big deal and a GB was a lot of storage.

[-] skittlebrau@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

One of my clients referred to Zip disks a few days ago. That really sent me back. Only my rich friends had Jaz drives, whereas the rest of us were still using Zip disks and optical media. Those early USB thumb drives at USB 1.0 speeds were also painfully slow.

My portable storage journey progressed from 5.25” floppy disks, 3.5” diskettes, Zip disk, CD-R/RW, DVD-R/RW, 2.5”/3.5” external HDDs and now portable NVME SSDs.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

I remember learning that 3.5" disks were still called "floppy" disks, despite being rigid plastic. My teacher took apart a disk and showed us how the inside was a film, but all that did was encourage us to take apart the disks and make desk toys out of the springs.

[-] AtariDump@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

No LS-120 or eSATA drives. :-)

[-] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 6 months ago

That’s fair.

[-] tal@lemmy.today 3 points 6 months ago

Depending upon your storage setup, may be able to make use of an SSD cache drive for a larger rotational drive array, though.

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Ssd for boot but not cost effective for nas. Nor do I trust their longevity.

[-] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago

SSD longevity seems to be better than HDDs overall. The limiting factor is how many write cycles the SSD can handle, but in most cases the write endurance is so high that it's unreachable by most home/NAS systems.

SSDs are however really bad for cold storage, as they will lose the charge stored in their cells if left unpowered too long. When the SSD is powered it will automatically refresh the cells in the background to ensure they don't lose their charge.

this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
171 points (97.2% liked)

Selfhosted

40734 readers
349 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS