Seagate 3TB ST3000DM001 and 2TB ST2000DM001 Compatible?

[Poooh]

Hi, just to keep evryone informed, here is the thread at Seagate about these disks: http://forums.seagate.com/t5/Barracuda- ... ight/false

Daniel

[doktornotor]

Looking at this thread, looks like another green idiocy/clearly faulty FW in place with these drives. Anyone of the unlucky owners of this rubbish here tried to disable APM on the drives?

[sl1000]

Interesting. qnap comes with hdparm, and via ipkg a newer version is installable. Via hdparm, the apm setting could be set to 255. That might fix it until Seagate releases a new firmware?

[mokies]

Was reviewing the updated compatibility list, which is now lists the ST3000DM001 & 2TB ST2000DM001 as not recommended.

Seagate ST3000DM001 3000 Note11 & Note12 & Note 15
Seagate ST2000DM001 2000 Note2 & Note 15

Bother drives refer to note 15, however there is no note 15 in the page but there is a note 14 that is not referenced by any other drive. I suspect the pages was incorrectly updated (not the first time). Note 14 is interesting and seems to give an explanation to the problem many of us have been experiencing.

Note14
If a HDD SMART test is performed on a drive concurrently with data access, the drive might be ejected from the RAID volume. To solve this issue, please upgrade firmware to 3.6.3 or above.

When is firmware 3.6.3 going to be released, given the current version is 3.6.1?

One other question, I've opened a support ticket with QNAP and have not had any response for over a week, is this normal QNAP support?

[sl1000]

no, response should be within 2 working days. send qnapalex a pm with your support number to get some assistance.
3.6.3 should be released quite soon.

[mokies]

Finally note 15 has been posted, which basically solves nothing.

Note15
According to stability issues reported by some users, we list the hard drive models in the Not Recommended List temporarily. We are investigating the reported issues and will move these hard drives back to the compatibility list once the problems are resolved.

[2000wolf]

After reading all these complaints I will never never use relatively inexpensive Seagate or Western Digital desktop drives in my NAS...

[George_Itee]

Hello,

I have 6 Seagate 3TB ST3000DM001 (RAID 6) in my Qnap and they are working fine.No strange sounds or anything. Of course, two of them broke in the first week of use, but the replacements have been going steady for 6 months now. Hope it lasts

[doktornotor]

and they are working fine. ... Of course, two of them broke in the first week of use

SCNR!

[jinu_j]

What is the firmware on the disk? These disks have a firmware update available though, but not sure when it was released.

http://knowledge.seagate.com/articles/e ... Q/223651en

[erwinsie]

im so close buying ts-412 and seagate goflex external 3tb and then rip the drive off (people said i will find ST3000DM001 inside).
lucky saw this. then i might hold on my purchasing, unless there are similar prices drive 3tb i can buy and compatible with qnap.
fyi, ST3000DM001 is around USD158 each

[luwak]

I finally figured out how to fix my drive issue. I got rid of my QNAP and got a SYNOLOGY. Best decision I have made love it and have not had any issues with the same drives that the QNAP device rejected. Device is better, service is better. Finally a smile on my face. <<<<SEE YA QNAP>>>>>

[lschafroth]

I'm the opposite. I am running away from Synology. HORRIBLE AFP performance and no tech support of any kind.

[sl1000]

i read a lot of issues with synology and the STx000DM001 Drives now too. It seems to be a drive issue (just do a google) not a nas issue. First batch of drives where ok, and now new batches (especially the ones from China) seem to fail awfully quick.

He'll find out after a week i guess

[miroj]

2TB ST2000DM001 Compatible? ..... installed in TS-419 PII, everything was new. Raid5 setup with 3 HDD. Middle drive was ejected after 24 hours. Installation and insertion did not change the problem.

The management software decided that it had read/write errors. It must have exceeded the good behaviour limit.

Replaced with Hitachi ... should have done so in the first moment.