On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 07:52:32 -0500 Dan Ritter wrote:
> No, my interpretation is that the average (mean) lifetime
> between failures should be the listed value. At 114 years, half
> of the population of drives should still be working.
>
> This is obviously not congruent with reality.
I'd say
>> > Claimed MTBF: 1 million hours. Believe it or not, this is par
>> > for the course for high-end disks.
>> >
>> > 24 hours a day, 365 days a year: 8760 hours per year.
>> > 100/8760 = 114 years.
>> >
>> > So, no: MTBF numbers must be presumed to be malicious lies.
>>
>> With your
hede wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 14:05:33 -0500 Dan Ritter wrote:
>
> > Claimed MTBF: 1 million hours. Believe it or not, this is par
> > for the course for high-end disks.
> >
> > 24 hours a day, 365 days a year: 8760 hours per year.
> > 100/8760 = 114 years.
> >
> > So, no: MTBF
On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 14:05:33 -0500 Dan Ritter wrote:
> Claimed MTBF: 1 million hours. Believe it or not, this is par
> for the course for high-end disks.
>
> 24 hours a day, 365 days a year: 8760 hours per year.
> 100/8760 = 114 years.
>
> So, no: MTBF numbers must be presumed to be
4 matches
Mail list logo
