Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #151246 > unrolled thread
| Started by | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-10 20:33 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-09-14 14:45 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 69 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-10 20:33 -0500
Re: New hard drive Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-10 23:23 -0400
Re: New hard drive Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2015-09-11 07:07 +0100
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-14 10:20 -0500
Re: New hard drive Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-14 13:53 -0400
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-14 13:05 -0500
Re: New hard drive Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-14 15:09 -0400
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-14 14:18 -0500
Re: New hard drive Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-09-15 10:08 +0100
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-15 05:28 -0500
Re: New hard drive Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-09-15 13:43 +0200
Re: New hard drive Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-15 16:19 +0000
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-15 13:15 -0500
Re: New hard drive Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-16 07:04 +0000
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-16 08:39 -0500
Re: New hard drive Joe Makowiec <makowiec@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-16 14:52 +0000
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-17 15:37 -0500
Re: New hard drive scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-16 13:42 +0000
Re: New hard drive Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-09-15 15:34 -0400
Re: New hard drive Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-15 17:29 -0400
Re: New hard drive Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 22:00 +0000
Re: New hard drive Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 03:58 +0000
Re: New hard drive "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-17 00:43 -0500
Re: New hard drive Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 05:59 +0000
Re: New hard drive Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 11:51 +0000
Re: New hard drive hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-17 13:18 -0700
Re: New hard drive Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-09-17 19:15 -0400
Re: New hard drive "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-20 17:27 +1000
Re: New hard drive hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-17 13:13 -0700
Re: New hard drive Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-09-17 06:24 -0400
Re: New hard drive Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 11:51 +0000
Re: New hard drive Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 18:02 +0000
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-15 13:12 -0500
Re: New hard drive Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 22:00 +0000
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-17 19:29 -0500
Re: New hard drive "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 10:29 +0100
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-17 19:31 -0500
Re: New hard drive Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-15 16:19 +0000
Re: New hard drive Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-15 17:48 +0000
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-15 13:17 -0500
Re: New hard drive "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-11 09:28 -0500
Re: New hard drive scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-11 14:59 +0000
Re: New hard drive Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-11 11:32 -0400
Re: New hard drive Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-09-11 16:06 +0000
Re: New hard drive scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-11 16:06 +0000
Re: New hard drive "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-12 05:21 +1000
Re: New hard drive "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-12 05:16 +1000
Re: New hard drive "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-11 10:42 -0500
Re: New hard drive scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-11 16:09 +0000
Re: New hard drive Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-11 12:20 -0400
Re: New hard drive "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-12 05:18 +1000
Re: New hard drive "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-12 05:08 +1000
Re: New hard drive "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-11 14:34 -0500
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-15 05:29 -0500
Re: New hard drive terry+googleblog@tmk.com - 2015-09-11 16:05 -0700
Re: New hard drive Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-09-11 11:55 -0400
Re: New hard drive Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2015-09-11 14:42 -0300
Re: New hard drive Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-11 16:10 -0400
Re: New hard drive Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-09-11 15:07 -0700
Re: New hard drive sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2015-09-12 15:34 -0400
Re: New hard drive Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-09-12 12:56 -0700
Re: New hard drive Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-09-12 13:02 -0700
Re: New hard drive "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-11 14:39 -0500
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-14 10:25 -0500
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-14 10:22 -0500
Re: New hard drive Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-14 13:49 -0400
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-14 13:07 -0500
Re: New hard drive hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-14 11:10 -0700
Re: New hard drive philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-09-14 14:45 -0500
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 09:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <d5g6nnFf5u4U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #151246 |
"philo" wrote: > Today I installed a 4Tb hard drive in a friend's machine... > it went well and was a "no big deal" operation. > > > Seems like only yesterday...with trembling hands...I replaced the 850 meg > drive in my P-1 with a 2 Gb drive. I was sure nervous when I did it and > when I got it installed and checked the drive's capacity, I felt like I > was in a huge empty canyon. Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is applied to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 14:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1%BIx.48652$lq4.42332@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #151253 |
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes:
>"philo" wrote:
>
>> Today I installed a 4Tb hard drive in a friend's machine...
>> it went well and was a "no big deal" operation.
>>
>>
>> Seems like only yesterday...with trembling hands...I replaced the 850 meg
>> drive in my P-1 with a 2 Gb drive. I was sure nervous when I did it and
>> when I got it installed and checked the drive's capacity, I felt like I
>> was in a huge empty canyon.
>
>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a
>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is applied
>to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts.
>
# smartctl --all /dev/sdc
smartctl 6.2 2014-07-16 r3952 [x86_64-linux-3.19.8-100.fc20.x86_64] (local build)
Copyright (C) 2002-13, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org
=== START OF INFORMATION SECTION ===
Model Family: Seagate Desktop HDD.15
Device Model: ST4000DM000-1F2168
Serial Number: S300HH9N
LU WWN Device Id: 5 000c50 06dd7aa97
Firmware Version: CC54
User Capacity: 4,000,787,030,016 bytes [4.00 TB]
Sector Sizes: 512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical
Rotation Rate: 5900 rpm
Device is: In smartctl database [for details use: -P show]
ATA Version is: ACS-2, ACS-3 T13/2161-D revision 3b
SATA Version is: SATA 3.1, 6.0 Gb/s (current: 6.0 Gb/s)
Local Time is: Fri Sep 11 07:56:38 2015 PDT
SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability.
SMART support is: Enabled
=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED
General SMART Values:
Offline data collection status: (0x00) Offline data collection activity
was never started.
Auto Offline Data Collection: Disabled.
Self-test execution status: ( 0) The previous self-test routine completed
without error or no self-test has ever
been run.
Total time to complete Offline
data collection: ( 107) seconds.
Offline data collection
capabilities: (0x73) SMART execute Offline immediate.
Auto Offline data collection on/off support.
Suspend Offline collection upon new
command.
No Offline surface scan supported.
Self-test supported.
Conveyance Self-test supported.
Selective Self-test supported.
SMART capabilities: (0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering
power-saving mode.
Supports SMART auto save timer.
Error logging capability: (0x01) Error logging supported.
General Purpose Logging supported.
Short self-test routine
recommended polling time: ( 1) minutes.
Extended self-test routine
recommended polling time: ( 507) minutes.
Conveyance self-test routine
recommended polling time: ( 2) minutes.
SCT capabilities: (0x1085) SCT Status supported.
SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 10
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail Always - 19125192
3 Spin_Up_Time 0x0003 092 092 000 Pre-fail Always - 0
4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age Always - 24
5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010 Pre-fail Always - 0
7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail Always - 1897873
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 090 090 000 Old_age Always - 9478
10 Spin_Retry_Count 0x0013 100 100 097 Pre-fail Always - 0
12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age Always - 24
183 Runtime_Bad_Block 0x0032 099 099 000 Old_age Always - 1
184 End-to-End_Error 0x0032 100 100 099 Old_age Always - 0
187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
188 Command_Timeout 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0 0 0
189 High_Fly_Writes 0x003a 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022 069 056 045 Old_age Always - 31 (Min/Max 22/44)
191 G-Sense_Error_Rate 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 077 077 000 Old_age Always - 47740
194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 031 044 000 Old_age Always - 31 (0 19 0 0 0)
197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x003e 200 200 000 Old_age Always - 0
240 Head_Flying_Hours 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 5250h+48m+45.560s
241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 2814136976
242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 3700421168
SMART Error Log Version: 1
No Errors Logged
SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
No self-tests have been logged. [To run self-tests, use: smartctl -t]
SMART Selective self-test log data structure revision number 1
SPAN MIN_LBA MAX_LBA CURRENT_TEST_STATUS
1 0 0 Not_testing
2 0 0 Not_testing
3 0 0 Not_testing
4 0 0 Not_testing
5 0 0 Not_testing
Selective self-test flags (0x0):
After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk.
If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute delay.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 11:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msus31$v06$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #151255 |
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: > "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is applied >>to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. > > # smartctl --all /dev/sdc > ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE > 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail Always - 19125192 > 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010 Pre-fail Always - 0 > 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail Always - 1897873 ... > SMART Error Log Version: 1 > No Errors Logged These numbers have never been clear to me. How can the worst be 99, but the value 108? I would have thought 108 is cumulative since the last clear, but there's no evidence of any time period that I can see. Also, the "raw" value is in the millions. I have 2 1TB hard drives and 1 128G SDD. The SSD shows some pretty good numbers: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 48 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 32 160 Uncorrectable_Error_Cnt 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 161 Valid_Spare_Block_Cnt 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 45 163 Initial_Bad_Block_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 24 164 Total_Erase_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 1425 165 Max_Erase_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 6 166 Min_Erase_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 167 Average_Erase_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 1 168 Max_Erase_Count_of_Spec 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 3000 169 Remaining_Lifetime_Perc 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 100 175 Program_Fail_Count_Chip 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 176 Erase_Fail_Count_Chip 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 177 Wear_Leveling_Count 0x0000 100 100 050 Old_age Offline - 0 178 Runtime_Invalid_Blk_Cnt 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 181 Program_Fail_Cnt_Total 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 182 Erase_Fail_Count_Total 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 15 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 23 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0000 100 100 016 Old_age Offline - 0 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x0000 100 100 050 Old_age Offline - 639 232 Available_Reservd_Space 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 100 241 Host_Writes_32MiB 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 3328 242 Host_Reads_32MiB 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 2900 245 Unkn_SiliconMotion_Attr 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 5700 But now I know I don't understand the output. The 2 1TB drives get remounted read only all summer long. They don't like the heat in my office. Still, smart doesn't give me any hints. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 16:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d5gcfcF98ltU25@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #151256 |
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:32:29 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: > >> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >>>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is >>>applied to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. >> >> # smartctl --all /dev/sdc ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE >> WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE >> 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail >> Always - 19125192 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 >> 100 010 Pre-fail Always - 0 7 Seek_Error_Rate >> 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail Always - 1897873 > ... >> SMART Error Log Version: 1 No Errors Logged > > These numbers have never been clear to me. > How can the worst be 99, but the value 108? > > I would have thought 108 is cumulative since the last clear, but there's > no evidence of any time period that I can see. > Also, the "raw" value is in the millions. The VALUE and WORST columns contain normalised values for all of the attributes, between 0 and 255. The VALUE part is the current normalised rate, over time. The WORST part is the normalised value of the worst rate there has been in the history of the device. The THRESH value is the point at which the device is likely to fail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 16:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s_CIx.48654$lq4.41579@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #151256 |
Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> writes: >scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: > >> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >>>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is applied >>>to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. >> >> # smartctl --all /dev/sdc >> ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE >> 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail Always - 19125192 >> 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010 Pre-fail Always - 0 >> 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail Always - 1897873 >... >> SMART Error Log Version: 1 >> No Errors Logged > >These numbers have never been clear to me. $ man smartctl ... Each Attribute has a "Raw" value, printed under the heading "RAW_VALUE", and a "Normalized" value printed under the heading "VALUE". [Note: smartctl prints these values in base-10.] In the example just given, the "Raw Value" for Attribute 12 would be the actual number of times that the disk has been power-cycled, for example 365 if the disk has been turned on once per day for exactly one year. Each vendor uses their own algorithm to convert this "Raw" value to a "Normalized" value in the range from 1 to 254. Please keep in mind that smartctl only reports the different Attribute types, values, and thresholds as read from the device. It does not carry out the conversion between "Raw" and "Normalized" values: this is done by the disk's firmware. ... Each Attribute also has a Threshold value (whose range is 0 to 255) which is printed under the heading "THRESH". If the Normalized value is less than or equal to the Threshold value, then the Attribute is said to have failed. If the Attribute is a pre-failure Attribute, then disk failure is imminent. ... So to summarize: the Raw Attribute values are the ones that might have a real physical interpretation, such as "Temperature Celsius", "Hours", or "Start-Stop Cycles". Each manufacturer converts these, using their detailed knowledge of the disk's operations and failure modes, to Normalized Attribute values in the range 1-254. The current and worst (lowest measured) of these Normalized Attribute values are stored on the disk, along with a Threshold value that the manufacturer has determined will indicate that the disk is going to fail, or that it has exceeded its design age or aging limit. smartctl does not calculate any of the Attribute values, thresholds, or types, it merely reports them from the SMART data on the device. >How can the worst be 99, but the value 108? Because failure is indicated by VALUE < THRESH.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-12 05:21 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <d5gnt9Fjhj8U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #151260 |
"Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote in message news:s_CIx.48654$lq4.41579@fx10.iad... > Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> writes: >>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: >> >>> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>>>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >>>>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is >>>>applied >>>>to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. >>> >>> # smartctl --all /dev/sdc >>> ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE >>> UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE >>> 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail >>> s - 19125192 >>> 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010 Pre-fail >>> s - 0 >>> 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail >>> s - 1897873 >>... >>> SMART Error Log Version: 1 >>> No Errors Logged >> >>These numbers have never been clear to me. > > $ man smartctl > ... > > Each Attribute has a "Raw" value, printed under the heading "RAW_VALUE", That isn't the case with that Raw_Read_Error_Rate field and Seagate drives. > and a "Normalized" value printed under the heading "VALUE". [Note: > smartctl prints these values in base-10.] In the example > just given, the "Raw Value" for Attribute 12 would be the actual number > of times that the disk has been power-cycled, for example 365 if the > disk has been turned on once per day for exactly one year. > Each vendor uses their own algorithm to convert this "Raw" value to a > "Normalized" value in the range from 1 to 254. Please keep in mind > that smartctl only reports the different Attribute types, > values, and thresholds as read from the device. It does not carry out > the conversion between "Raw" and "Normalized" values: this is done by > the disk's firmware. > ... > Each Attribute also has a Threshold value (whose range is 0 to 255) > which is printed under the heading "THRESH". If the Normalized value is > less than or equal to the Threshold value, then the Attribute is said > to have failed. If the Attribute is a pre-failure Attribute, then disk > failure is imminent. > ... > So to summarize: the Raw Attribute values are the ones that might have > a real physical interpretation, such as "Temperature Celsius", "Hours", > or "Start-Stop Cycles". Each manufacturer converts these, using > their detailed knowledge of the disk's operations and failure modes, to > Normalized Attribute values in the range 1-254. The current and worst > (lowest measured) of these Normalized Attribute values are stored > on the disk, along with a Threshold value that the manufacturer has > determined will indicate that the disk is going to fail, or that it has > exceeded its design age or aging limit. smartctl does not calculate > any of the Attribute values, thresholds, or types, it merely reports > them from the SMART data on the device. > > >>How can the worst be 99, but the value 108? > > Because failure is indicated by VALUE < THRESH. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-12 05:16 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <d5gnjoFjei6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #151256 |
"Dan Espen" <despen@verizon.net> wrote in message news:msus31$v06$1@dont-email.me... > scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: > >> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >>>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is >>>applied >>>to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. >> >> # smartctl --all /dev/sdc >> ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED >> WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE >> 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail >> s - 19125192 >> 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010 Pre-fail >> s - 0 >> 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail >> s - 1897873 > ... >> SMART Error Log Version: 1 >> No Errors Logged > These numbers have never been clear to me. Yes, they are quite complex. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.M.A.R.T. > How can the worst be 99, but the value 108? > I would have thought 108 is cumulative since the last clear, No. > but there's no evidence of any time period that I can see. > Also, the "raw" value is in the millions. The raw value is mostly what it says, the actual number of occurrences of that field, but not with the Raw_Read_Error_Rate with Seagate drives, that field is in fact an encoded field. > I have 2 1TB hard drives and 1 128G SDD. > > The SSD shows some pretty good numbers: > > ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED > WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE > 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 And that shows that that field is done quite different in non Seagate drives. > 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 48 That one isn't clock hours either. > 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 32 > 160 Uncorrectable_Error_Cnt 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 161 Valid_Spare_Block_Cnt 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 45 > 163 Initial_Bad_Block_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 24 > 164 Total_Erase_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 1425 > 165 Max_Erase_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 6 > 166 Min_Erase_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 167 Average_Erase_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 1 > 168 Max_Erase_Count_of_Spec 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 3000 > 169 Remaining_Lifetime_Perc 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 100 > 175 Program_Fail_Count_Chip 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 176 Erase_Fail_Count_Chip 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 177 Wear_Leveling_Count 0x0000 100 100 050 Old_age > line - 0 > 178 Runtime_Invalid_Blk_Cnt 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 181 Program_Fail_Cnt_Total 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 182 Erase_Fail_Count_Total 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 15 > 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 23 > 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0000 100 100 016 Old_age > line - 0 > 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x0000 100 100 050 Old_age > line - 639 > 232 Available_Reservd_Space 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 100 > 241 Host_Writes_32MiB 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 3328 > 242 Host_Reads_32MiB 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 2900 > 245 Unkn_SiliconMotion_Attr 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 5700 > > But now I know I don't understand the output. > > The 2 1TB drives get remounted read only all summer long. > They don't like the heat in my office. > Still, smart doesn't give me any hints. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.M.A.R.T.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 10:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <d5gb2cFg972U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #151255 |
"Scott Lurndal" wrote: > "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>"philo" wrote: >> >>> Today I installed a 4Tb hard drive in a friend's machine... >>> it went well and was a "no big deal" operation. >>> >>> >>> Seems like only yesterday...with trembling hands...I replaced the 850 >>> meg >>> drive in my P-1 with a 2 Gb drive. I was sure nervous when I did it and >>> when I got it installed and checked the drive's capacity, I felt like I >>> was in a huge empty canyon. >> >>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is >>applied >>to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. >> > > # smartctl --all /dev/sdc > smartctl 6.2 2014-07-16 r3952 [x86_64-linux-3.19.8-100.fc20.x86_64] (local > build) > Copyright (C) 2002-13, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, > www.smartmontools.org > > === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === > Model Family: Seagate Desktop HDD.15 > Device Model: ST4000DM000-1F2168 > Serial Number: S300HH9N > LU WWN Device Id: 5 000c50 06dd7aa97 > Firmware Version: CC54 > User Capacity: 4,000,787,030,016 bytes [4.00 TB] > Sector Sizes: 512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical > Rotation Rate: 5900 rpm > Device is: In smartctl database [for details use: -P show] > ATA Version is: ACS-2, ACS-3 T13/2161-D revision 3b > SATA Version is: SATA 3.1, 6.0 Gb/s (current: 6.0 Gb/s) > Local Time is: Fri Sep 11 07:56:38 2015 PDT > SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. > SMART support is: Enabled > > === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === > SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED > > General SMART Values: > Offline data collection status: (0x00) Offline data collection activity > was never started. > Auto Offline Data Collection: > Disabled. > Self-test execution status: ( 0) The previous self-test routine > completed > without error or no self-test has > ever > been run. > Total time to complete Offline > data collection: ( 107) seconds. > Offline data collection > capabilities: (0x73) SMART execute Offline immediate. > Auto Offline data collection on/off > support. > Suspend Offline collection upon new > command. > No Offline surface scan supported. > Self-test supported. > Conveyance Self-test supported. > Selective Self-test supported. > SMART capabilities: (0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering > power-saving mode. > Supports SMART auto save timer. > Error logging capability: (0x01) Error logging supported. > General Purpose Logging supported. > Short self-test routine > recommended polling time: ( 1) minutes. > Extended self-test routine > recommended polling time: ( 507) minutes. > Conveyance self-test routine > recommended polling time: ( 2) minutes. > SCT capabilities: (0x1085) SCT Status supported. > > SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 10 > Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: > ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED > WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE > 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail > s - 19125192 > 3 Spin_Up_Time 0x0003 092 092 000 Pre-fail > s - 0 > 4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age > ys - 24 > 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010 Pre-fail > s - 0 > 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail > s - 1897873 > 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 090 090 000 Old_age > ys - 9478 > 10 Spin_Retry_Count 0x0013 100 100 097 Pre-fail > s - 0 > 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age > ys - 24 > 183 Runtime_Bad_Block 0x0032 099 099 000 Old_age > ys - 1 > 184 End-to-End_Error 0x0032 100 100 099 Old_age > ys - 0 > 187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 188 Command_Timeout 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 0 0 > 189 High_Fly_Writes 0x003a 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022 069 056 045 Old_age > ys - 31 (Min/Max 22/44) > 191 G-Sense_Error_Rate 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 077 077 000 Old_age > ys - 47740 > 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 031 044 000 Old_age > ys - 31 (0 19 0 0 0) > 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x003e 200 200 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 240 Head_Flying_Hours 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age > line - 5250h+48m+45.560s > 241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age > line - 2814136976 > 242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age > line - 3700421168 > > SMART Error Log Version: 1 > No Errors Logged > > SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 > No self-tests have been logged. [To run self-tests, use: smartctl -t] > > > SMART Selective self-test log data structure revision number 1 > SPAN MIN_LBA MAX_LBA CURRENT_TEST_STATUS > 1 0 0 Not_testing > 2 0 0 Not_testing > 3 0 0 Not_testing > 4 0 0 Not_testing > 5 0 0 Not_testing > Selective self-test flags (0x0): > After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk. > If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute > delay. Thanks a lot! As I understand it there were 19e6 errors in 5250 hours of use, so an error rate of 3.6e3 per hour or about one error per second. Does that seem like I have done something terribly wrong?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 16:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <91DIx.48655$lq4.12414@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #151257 |
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >"Scott Lurndal" wrote: >> 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail - 19125192 >Thanks a lot! As I understand it there were 19e6 errors in 5250 hours of >use, so an error rate of 3.6e3 per hour or about one error per second. Does >that seem like I have done something terribly wrong? > The RAW values are manufacturer specific, there is no standard meaning associated with them. The VALUE/WORST/THRESH numbers are arbitrarily mapped from the raw value by the drive firmware into an unsigned 8-bit field. The higher the VALUE w.r.t. THRESH, the healthier the drive.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 12:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msuutj$96i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #151261 |
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: > "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>"Scott Lurndal" wrote: > >>> 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail - 19125192 > >>Thanks a lot! As I understand it there were 19e6 errors in 5250 hours of >>use, so an error rate of 3.6e3 per hour or about one error per second. Does >>that seem like I have done something terribly wrong? > > The RAW values are manufacturer specific, there is no standard meaning > associated with them. The VALUE/WORST/THRESH numbers are arbitrarily mapped > from the raw value by the drive firmware into an unsigned 8-bit field. The higher > the VALUE w.r.t. THRESH, the healthier the drive. Thanks, think I have it too. Bottom line, next time read the man page instead of doing Google searches. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-12 05:18 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <d5gnocFjfjiU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #151257 |
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote in message news:d5gb2cFg972U1@mid.individual.net... > "Scott Lurndal" wrote: > >> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>>"philo" wrote: >>> >>>> Today I installed a 4Tb hard drive in a friend's machine... >>>> it went well and was a "no big deal" operation. >>>> >>>> >>>> Seems like only yesterday...with trembling hands...I replaced the 850 >>>> meg >>>> drive in my P-1 with a 2 Gb drive. I was sure nervous when I did it and >>>> when I got it installed and checked the drive's capacity, I felt like I >>>> was in a huge empty canyon. >>> >>>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >>>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is >>>applied >>>to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. >>> >> >> # smartctl --all /dev/sdc >> smartctl 6.2 2014-07-16 r3952 [x86_64-linux-3.19.8-100.fc20.x86_64] >> (local build) >> Copyright (C) 2002-13, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, >> www.smartmontools.org >> >> === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === >> Model Family: Seagate Desktop HDD.15 >> Device Model: ST4000DM000-1F2168 >> Serial Number: S300HH9N >> LU WWN Device Id: 5 000c50 06dd7aa97 >> Firmware Version: CC54 >> User Capacity: 4,000,787,030,016 bytes [4.00 TB] >> Sector Sizes: 512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical >> Rotation Rate: 5900 rpm >> Device is: In smartctl database [for details use: -P show] >> ATA Version is: ACS-2, ACS-3 T13/2161-D revision 3b >> SATA Version is: SATA 3.1, 6.0 Gb/s (current: 6.0 Gb/s) >> Local Time is: Fri Sep 11 07:56:38 2015 PDT >> SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. >> SMART support is: Enabled >> >> === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === >> SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED >> >> General SMART Values: >> Offline data collection status: (0x00) Offline data collection activity >> was never started. >> Auto Offline Data Collection: >> Disabled. >> Self-test execution status: ( 0) The previous self-test routine >> completed >> without error or no self-test has >> ever >> been run. >> Total time to complete Offline >> data collection: ( 107) seconds. >> Offline data collection >> capabilities: (0x73) SMART execute Offline immediate. >> Auto Offline data collection >> on/off support. >> Suspend Offline collection upon >> new >> command. >> No Offline surface scan supported. >> Self-test supported. >> Conveyance Self-test supported. >> Selective Self-test supported. >> SMART capabilities: (0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering >> power-saving mode. >> Supports SMART auto save timer. >> Error logging capability: (0x01) Error logging supported. >> General Purpose Logging supported. >> Short self-test routine >> recommended polling time: ( 1) minutes. >> Extended self-test routine >> recommended polling time: ( 507) minutes. >> Conveyance self-test routine >> recommended polling time: ( 2) minutes. >> SCT capabilities: (0x1085) SCT Status supported. >> >> SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 10 >> Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: >> ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED >> WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE >> 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail s - >> 19125192 >> 3 Spin_Up_Time 0x0003 092 092 000 Pre-fail s - >> 0 >> 4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age ys - >> 24 >> 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010 Pre-fail s - >> 0 >> 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail s - >> 1897873 >> 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 090 090 000 Old_age ys - >> 9478 >> 10 Spin_Retry_Count 0x0013 100 100 097 Pre-fail s - >> 0 >> 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age ys - >> 24 >> 183 Runtime_Bad_Block 0x0032 099 099 000 Old_age >> - 1 >> 184 End-to-End_Error 0x0032 100 100 099 Old_age >> - 0 >> 187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age >> - 0 >> 188 Command_Timeout 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age >> - 0 0 0 >> 189 High_Fly_Writes 0x003a 100 100 000 Old_age >> - 0 >> 190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022 069 056 045 Old_age >> - 31 (Min/Max 22/44) >> 191 G-Sense_Error_Rate 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age >> - 0 >> 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age >> - 0 >> 193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 077 077 000 Old_age >> - 47740 >> 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 031 044 000 Old_age >> - 31 (0 19 0 0 0) >> 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age >> - 0 >> 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 100 100 000 Old_age >> - 0 >> 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x003e 200 200 000 Old_age >> - 0 >> 240 Head_Flying_Hours 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age >> - 5250h+48m+45.560s >> 241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age >> - 2814136976 >> 242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age >> - 3700421168 >> >> SMART Error Log Version: 1 >> No Errors Logged >> >> SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 >> No self-tests have been logged. [To run self-tests, use: smartctl -t] >> >> >> SMART Selective self-test log data structure revision number 1 >> SPAN MIN_LBA MAX_LBA CURRENT_TEST_STATUS >> 1 0 0 Not_testing >> 2 0 0 Not_testing >> 3 0 0 Not_testing >> 4 0 0 Not_testing >> 5 0 0 Not_testing >> Selective self-test flags (0x0): >> After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk. >> If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute >> delay. > > Thanks a lot! As I understand it there were 19e6 errors in 5250 hours of > use, No it does not. > so an error rate of 3.6e3 per hour or about one error per second. Does > that seem like I have done something terribly wrong? Yes, Seagate drives handle that field quite differently. That field is encoded, it isn't a count of the number of data errors what have been handled by the CRC system since the drive started to be used.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-12 05:08 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <d5gn5vFjaofU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #151255 |
"Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote in message news:1%BIx.48652$lq4.42332@fx10.iad... > "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>"philo" wrote: >> >>> Today I installed a 4Tb hard drive in a friend's machine... >>> it went well and was a "no big deal" operation. >>> >>> >>> Seems like only yesterday...with trembling hands...I replaced the 850 >>> meg >>> drive in my P-1 with a 2 Gb drive. I was sure nervous when I did it and >>> when I got it installed and checked the drive's capacity, I felt like I >>> was in a huge empty canyon. >> >>Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >>current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is >>applied >>to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. >> > > # smartctl --all /dev/sdc > smartctl 6.2 2014-07-16 r3952 [x86_64-linux-3.19.8-100.fc20.x86_64] (local > build) > Copyright (C) 2002-13, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, > www.smartmontools.org > > === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === > Model Family: Seagate Desktop HDD.15 > Device Model: ST4000DM000-1F2168 > Serial Number: S300HH9N > LU WWN Device Id: 5 000c50 06dd7aa97 > Firmware Version: CC54 > User Capacity: 4,000,787,030,016 bytes [4.00 TB] > Sector Sizes: 512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical > Rotation Rate: 5900 rpm > Device is: In smartctl database [for details use: -P show] > ATA Version is: ACS-2, ACS-3 T13/2161-D revision 3b > SATA Version is: SATA 3.1, 6.0 Gb/s (current: 6.0 Gb/s) > Local Time is: Fri Sep 11 07:56:38 2015 PDT > SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. > SMART support is: Enabled > > === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === > SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED > > General SMART Values: > Offline data collection status: (0x00) Offline data collection activity > was never started. > Auto Offline Data Collection: > Disabled. > Self-test execution status: ( 0) The previous self-test routine > completed > without error or no self-test has > ever > been run. > Total time to complete Offline > data collection: ( 107) seconds. > Offline data collection > capabilities: (0x73) SMART execute Offline immediate. > Auto Offline data collection on/off > support. > Suspend Offline collection upon new > command. > No Offline surface scan supported. > Self-test supported. > Conveyance Self-test supported. > Selective Self-test supported. > SMART capabilities: (0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering > power-saving mode. > Supports SMART auto save timer. > Error logging capability: (0x01) Error logging supported. > General Purpose Logging supported. > Short self-test routine > recommended polling time: ( 1) minutes. > Extended self-test routine > recommended polling time: ( 507) minutes. > Conveyance self-test routine > recommended polling time: ( 2) minutes. > SCT capabilities: (0x1085) SCT Status supported. > > SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 10 > Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: > ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED > WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE > 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 108 099 006 Pre-fail > s - 19125192 That number is not in fact the raw read error rate with Seagate drives. It's an encoded field which is much more complicated than that with Seagate drives and you can see that by comparing that field with other non Seagate drives of the same size. > 3 Spin_Up_Time 0x0003 092 092 000 Pre-fail > s - 0 > 4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age > ys - 24 > 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 010 Pre-fail > s - 0 > 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 063 060 030 Pre-fail > s - 1897873 > 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 090 090 000 Old_age > ys - 9478 > 10 Spin_Retry_Count 0x0013 100 100 097 Pre-fail > s - 0 > 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age > ys - 24 > 183 Runtime_Bad_Block 0x0032 099 099 000 Old_age > ys - 1 > 184 End-to-End_Error 0x0032 100 100 099 Old_age > ys - 0 > 187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 188 Command_Timeout 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 0 0 > 189 High_Fly_Writes 0x003a 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022 069 056 045 Old_age > ys - 31 (Min/Max 22/44) > 191 G-Sense_Error_Rate 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 077 077 000 Old_age > ys - 47740 > 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 031 044 000 Old_age > ys - 31 (0 19 0 0 0) > 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 100 100 000 Old_age > line - 0 > 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x003e 200 200 000 Old_age > ys - 0 > 240 Head_Flying_Hours 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age > line - 5250h+48m+45.560s > 241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age > line - 2814136976 > 242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age > line - 3700421168 > > SMART Error Log Version: 1 > No Errors Logged > > SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 > No self-tests have been logged. [To run self-tests, use: smartctl -t] > > > SMART Selective self-test log data structure revision number 1 > SPAN MIN_LBA MAX_LBA CURRENT_TEST_STATUS > 1 0 0 Not_testing > 2 0 0 Not_testing > 3 0 0 Not_testing > 4 0 0 Not_testing > 5 0 0 Not_testing > Selective self-test flags (0x0): > After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk. > If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute > delay. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 14:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <msva86$o8m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #151253 |
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote in message news:d5g6nnFf5u4U1@mid.individual.net... > "philo" wrote: > >> Today I installed a 4Tb hard drive in a friend's machine... >> it went well and was a "no big deal" operation. >> >> >> Seems like only yesterday...with trembling hands...I replaced the 850 meg >> drive in my P-1 with a 2 Gb drive. I was sure nervous when I did it and >> when I got it installed and checked the drive's capacity, I felt like I >> was in a huge empty canyon. > > Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a > current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is > applied to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. I read somewhere that a large percentage of the 3 TB drives have crashed, but that the 4 TB drives are much more reliable. -- numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-15 05:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mt8rr7$asb$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #151269 |
On 09/11/2015 02:34 PM, Charles Richmond wrote: > "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:d5g6nnFf5u4U1@mid.individual.net... >> "philo" wrote: >> >>> Today I installed a 4Tb hard drive in a friend's machine... >>> it went well and was a "no big deal" operation. >>> >>> >>> Seems like only yesterday...with trembling hands...I replaced the 850 >>> meg drive in my P-1 with a 2 Gb drive. I was sure nervous when I did >>> it and when I got it installed and checked the drive's capacity, I >>> felt like I was in a huge empty canyon. >> >> Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a >> current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is >> applied to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts. > > I read somewhere that a large percentage of the 3 TB drives have > crashed, but that the 4 TB drives are much more reliable. > Don't know about that but I've given the guy enough lectures about backing everything up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | terry+googleblog@tmk.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 16:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5ea0d495-a0d7-4d2d-837d-1e7280d3c445@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #151253 |
On Friday, September 11, 2015 at 10:28:08 AM UTC-4, Osmium wrote:
> Does anyone have any idea at all as to what the raw error rate is on a
> current 4 TB drive? That is before ECC and whatever other magic is applied
> to it. ISTM the signal must be meaured in nanovolts.
SAS drives are much better at revealing this information:
Error counter log:
Errors Corrected by Total Correction Gigabytes Total
ECC rereads/ errors algorithm processed uncorrected
fast | delayed rewrites corrected invocations [10^9 bytes] errors
read: 52515648 0 0 52515648 52515648 2100.253 0
write: 0 0 0 0 0 1383.062 0
verify: 41656319 0 0 41656319 41656319 1020.481 0
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 11:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msuthk$7i3$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #151246 |
On 10/09/2015 9:33 PM, philo wrote: > Today I installed a 4Tb hard drive in a friend's machine... it went > well and was a "no big deal" operation. > > > Seems like only yesterday...with trembling hands...I replaced the 850 > meg drive in my P-1 with a 2 Gb drive. I was sure nervous when I did > it and when I got it installed and checked the drive's capacity, I > felt like I was in a huge empty canyon. The first 1G drive I bought I paid $1300 for bargain it was at the time. Now I get 8G thumb drives at my local grocery store checkout for a small handful of pocket change. Someone sent me a advertisement for a 1T thumb drive. 20 Years from now we will be keeping a permanent record of our (entire) lives in high resolution 3D video:) w..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shadow <Sh@dow.br> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 14:42 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <qg46vadslok62gv3rf15pf73k9mtc3usrc@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #151258 |
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:55:24 -0400, Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote: >20 Years from now >we will be keeping a permanent record of our (entire) lives in high >resolution 3D video:) Just ask for a copy, it's on a government site somewhere ... ;) []'s -- Don't be evil - Google 2004 We have a new policy - Google 2012
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 16:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1509111609130.12210@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #151263 |
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015, Shadow wrote: > On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:55:24 -0400, Walter Banks > <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote: > >> 20 Years from now >> we will be keeping a permanent record of our (entire) lives in high >> resolution 3D video:) > > Just ask for a copy, it's on a government site somewhere ... > ;) > []'s YOu mean the government is now providing backup service? No fee charged, until you want something, at which point it costs big bucks? Or can you retrieve a missing file through the Freedom of Information Act? Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-11 15:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87fv2kzk2u.fsf@lhwserver.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #151271 |
Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> writes: > YOu mean the government is now providing backup service? except from when they aren't somebody's reference on Facebook Never Forget - On 09/10/01, Sec Rumsfeld announced $2.3T was missing from the pentagon operating budget. Hours later, the Pentagon Accounting Offices were Destroyed. https://www.facebook.com/End.AIPAC/photos/a.542024679212055.1073741825.379531218794736/903420069739179/ The War On Waste http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-war-on-waste/ some comments, backups? where were the data backups or had it be outsourced to private-equity subsidiary? aka enormous uptic last decade in outsourcing to for-profit companies and private-equity has so perfected looting for-profit gov. contractors ... they had the companies doing security clearances just filling out paperwork and not bothering to actually do any checks http://www.investingdaily.com/17693/spies-like-us/ Security clearances used to be a government function too, but are now a profit center for various private-equity subsidiaries. ... snip ... including company that did Snowden's security clearance. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress/article24750283.html http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2013/06/21/Heres-How-Edward-Snowden-Got-Top-Secret-Clearance more recent instance OPM Contractor's Parent Firm Has a Troubled History https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/06/24/opm-contractor-veritas/ Founded in 1992 by the late investment banker Robert McKeon, Veritas Capital grew quickly by buying up government contractors and forming close ties with former senior government officials. Of the many defense-related investments made by the company, the most famous has been the 2005 purchase of DynCorp International, a scandal-plagued company that played a pivotal role in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. ... snip ... private equity posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#private.equity The Pentagon Lost $8.5 TRILLION of Taxpayers' Money http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/06/the-pentagon-lost-8-5-trillion-of-taxpayer-money/ DOD isn't the only way that the military industrial complex has of sucking money .... congress also does "directed appropriation" foreign aid .... where a foreign country can only use the foreign aid for the purchase of specific american made military hardware (and of course since 9/11 ... it also has DHS) ... corporate representatives approach former eastern bloc countries and tell them if they vote for invasion of Iraq in the UN, they will get approval to join NATO and directed appropriation USAID (that can only be used to buy "modern" american made military equipment) http://www.amazon.com/Prophets-War-Lockheed-Military-Industrial-ebook/dp/B0047T86BA/ also http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/03/books/corrupt-from-top-to-bottom.html?pagewanted=1 HBO made a movie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon_Wars son-in-law 1st tour in Iraq was foot-patrol Fallujah 2004-2005, 2nd tour was "mounted", bradley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Bradley#M2A3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Fighting_Vehicle#M3_Bradley 2007-2008 (described as worse than Fallujah, but because administration said things were better didn't get much attention). http://www.amazon.com/Battle-Baqubah-Killing-Our-ebook/dp/B007VBBS9I/ they had boneyard size of three football fields full of destroyed Bradleys and Abrams M1 tanks, they were loosing so many Bradleys that they started getting mothballed Bradleys from Desert Storm (with incompatible/obsolete communication) ... and some related Pentagon remains stubbornly unable to account for its hundreds of billions (multiple trillions over the years); A celebration by the Marine Corps of its accounting prowess turns out to have been premature, with a discrepancy in a key audit of $800 million http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/08/03/17735/pentagon-remains-stubbornly-unable-account-its-billions The Pentagon Is Still Terrible at Accounting for Your Tax Dollars; A celebration by the Marine Corps of its accounting prowess turns out to have been premature, with a discrepancy in a key audit of $800 million. http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/03/the-pentagon-is-still-terrible-at-accounting-for-taxpayer-dollars-marine-corps-800-million-gao/ Marine Corps Can't Account for $800 Million http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/08/04/marine-corps-cant-account-for-800-million/ It mentions that lower level objections were run over and higher ups signed off as accurate despite objections. In theory if this was subject to Sarbanes-Oxley and sign-off on financial audits despite objections ... it would call for the people doing the sign-offs doing jail time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes%E2%80%93Oxley_Act 2010 CBO report was that previous decade, DOD budget was increased by over $2T compared to baseline, $1+T for the two wars ... and $1+T that they couldn't find anything to show for. How Private Contractors Have Created a Shadow NSA; A new cybersecurity elite moves between government and private practice, taking state secrets with them (also references oil rig company that was transformed into one of the largest defense contractors after former SECDEF and future VP becomes CEO, including no-bid contracts in Iraq) http://www.thenation.com/article/how-private-contractors-have-created-shadow-nsa/ above includes references to some of the events around the spreading (private-equity & for-profit) "success of failure" culture (make more money off series of failures) http://www.govexec.com/excellence/management-matters/2007/04/the-success-of-failure/24107/ (note sometimes clicking govexec serves up a blank page and you have to repeat the click) past posts mentioning military-industrial complex http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#military.industrial.complex perpetual war http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#perpetual.war -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sidd@situ.com (sidd) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-12 15:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mt1uod$2uo$1@Lazarus.situ.com> |
| In reply to | #151272 |
In article <87fv2kzk2u.fsf@lhwserver.localdomain>, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote: >The War On Waste >http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-war-on-waste/ > > >some comments, backups? > >where were the data backups or had it be outsourced to private-equity >subsidiary? aka enormous uptic last decade in outsourcing to for-profit >companies and private-equity has so perfected looting for-profit >gov. contractors ... they had the companies doing security clearances >just filling out paperwork and not bothering to actually do any checks >http://www.investingdaily.com/17693/spies-like-us/ a search for the words "DOD" and "unauditable" shows this was the case long before 2001 sidd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web