Results 1 to 5 of 5
Thread: Hard drive enclosures
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
Hard drive enclosures
I've recently filled up my 1TB external hard drive and am looking for more storage space.
I've decided to get myself a hard drive enclosure like this:
3.5" Dual SATA 2 Bay HDD Hard Drive USB 2.0 Enclosure Caddy | eBay
My plan is to get a dual-bay enclosure and put 2x2TB in it to give me a huge amount of storage space.
Unfortunately, quite a lot of the enclosures i've looked at state they are compatible with windows and mac. However, upon looking at other internet threads quite a lot of these enclosures are also unofficially compatible with linux.
I was wondering if anyone had (or knows of) a hard drive enclosure (at least dual bay that can support 2TB hard drives) that was compatible with linux. I don't want to buy something and, if it doesn't work, have all the aggravation of sending it back.
Thanks in advance.
I think all external HDs in the market are capable of supporting linux too. Just format the file system to ext2, ext3 or ext4.nujinini
Linux User #489667
Just a couple of comments:
USB 2.0 is fairly old tech now, so long as both your kernel and your hardware support it then you'll be just fine. And unless you're running really old stuff that shouldn't be an issue.
The specs on the unit says that it only supprts 1.5TBx2, so if you go with that actual unit you'll end up with one whole TB less storage than what you want (3 instead of 4).
Plus the specs do say that it includes a 1.5" cooling fan, but also say that heat dissipation occurs through the casing. In my mind this says that the case may get quite hot. If you decide to go with this particular unit you should be careful about where you place it. You should make sure that it is in a well ventilated area where a potentially hot metal case will cause no issues.
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
The computer i'm currently using is really old. I bought it second hand from someone I knew, it was old then and that was a year ago. It's nothing special hardware-wise (2GB RAM, 2x3.2GHZ processor, 80GB HDD) but it more than fulfills my movie-watching and web-surfing needs.
When I go onto a terminal and type "lsusb", all the usb ports are either 2.0 or 1.1. I don't think I have any usb 3.0 ports on my computer anyway.
I have a lot of space around my computer where I can place it. I do have some books though, so provided i'm away from those I should be fine.
I do have one more question (which I should probably put on a new thread) but are 7200rpm HDD better than 5400rpm HDD? Initially I thought 7200rpm were better, but I read something on a different forum saying that the 7200rpm drive is mainly used for running applications from, not data storage. If you're just storing data (which I will be if I get this) the 5400rpm is better. Would you agree with this, or is it a myth?
If it's a fairly old system then you won't have any 3.0 USB ports. That's only been affordable in laptops and desk tops for a couple of years now. But, if it's really old it may not have 2.0 support either. You have the hardware or it wouldn't be showing in lsusb. Just to be on the safe side I'd look up the kernel version and make sure it can handle 2.0. (But, once again, unless you're running something ancient it shouldn't be an issue.)
As far a platter speed goes; I subscribe to the Tim Taylor school of philosophy: More power and faster is almost always better. But, in your case, since this is an external drive on a 2.0 port IIRC you'll bump up against the 480 MBps limit on the transfer rate on 2.0 and spending the extra cash on a 7400rpm drive would probably be a waste of money. In other words you'd be paying for a fair bit of extra performance that couldn't take advantage of any way.