maarten <maarten@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tuesday 04 January 2005 17:21, Peter T. Breuer wrote: > > Maarten <maarten@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Nope, not 10 years, not 20 years, not even 40 years. See this Seagate > > > sheet below where they go on record with a whopping 1200.000 hours MTBF. > > > That translates to 137 years. > > > > I believe that too. They REALLY have kept the monkeys well away. > > They're only a factor of ten out from what I think it is, so I certainly > > believe them. And they probably discarded the ones that failed burn-in > > too. > > > > > Now can you please state here and now that you > > > actually believe that figure ? > > > > Of course. Why wouldn't I? They are stating something like 1% lossage > > per year under perfect ideal conditions, no dust, no power spikes, no > > a/c overloads, etc. I'd easily belueve that. > > No spindle will take 137 years of abuse at the incredibly high speed of 10000 > rpm and not show enough wear so that the heads will either collide with the Nor does anyone say it will! That's the mtbf, that's all. It's a parameter in a statistical distribrution. The inverse of the probability of failure per unit time. Peter - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
