A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Storage (alternative)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

S.M.A.R.T. reports bad sectors, but badblocks no errors?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 2nd 19, 05:41 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Percival P. Cassidy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 215
Default S.M.A.R.T. reports bad sectors, but badblocks no errors?

What should I make of a drive for which S.M.A.R.T. reports 8 bad sectors
(a single 4K block, I assume), but badblocks reports no errors on a
read-write test?

Perce
  #2  
Old July 2nd 19, 07:31 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Grant Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default S.M.A.R.T. reports bad sectors, but badblocks no errors?

On 7/2/19 10:41 AM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
What should I make of a drive for which S.M.A.R.T. reports 8 bad sectors
(a single 4K block, I assume), but badblocks reports no errors on a
read-write test?


I think it depends on the drive is.

I suspect that any drive that has S.M.A.R.T. also has spare sectors that
aren't visible to the OS.

As such, it's entirely possible that the 8 sectors are indeed bad and
have been swapped out with spares that are good.

Running a bad block check from the OS (outside of the drive & integrated
controller) on such a will likely not see any problem(s).



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
  #3  
Old July 2nd 19, 09:49 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Percival P. Cassidy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 215
Default S.M.A.R.T. reports bad sectors, but badblocks no errors?

On 7/2/19 2:31 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:

What should I make of a drive for which S.M.A.R.T. reports 8 bad
sectors (a single 4K block, I assume), but badblocks reports no errors
on a read-write test?


I think it depends on the drive is.

I suspect that any drive that has S.M.A.R.T. also has spare sectors that
aren't visible to the OS.

As such, it's entirely possible that the 8 sectors are indeed bad and
have been swapped out with spares that are good.

Running a bad block check from the OS (outside of the drive & integrated
controller) on such a will likely not see any problem(s).


Now, after just one more run of badblocks, S.M.A.R.T. reports no errors.
So I assume that now a spare block is in use.

Perce
  #4  
Old July 2nd 19, 10:44 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Grant Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default S.M.A.R.T. reports bad sectors, but badblocks no errors?

On 7/2/19 2:49 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
Now, after just one more run of badblocks, S.M.A.R.T. reports no errors.
So I assume that now a spare block is in use.


So, the disk likely did have a problem. But I'm guessing it has worked
around the problem.

Now the question becomes is the problem stable and not going to grow?
Or is the problem going to spread. Only time and monitoring will tell.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
  #5  
Old July 2nd 19, 11:17 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Percival P. Cassidy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 215
Default S.M.A.R.T. reports bad sectors, but badblocks no errors?

On 7/2/19 5:44 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:

Now, after just one more run of badblocks, S.M.A.R.T. reports no
errors. So I assume that now a spare block is in use.


So, the disk likely did have a problem.* But I'm guessing it has worked
around the problem.

Now the question becomes is the problem stable and not going to grow? Or
is the problem going to spread.* Only time and monitoring will tell.


This is a brand-new Seagate drive, so do I return it for replacement, or
assume that the problem is now solved (false alarm perhaps), or wait
till it acts up again and get it replaced by Seagate by a "refurbished"
(i.e., tested more thoroughly than a brand-new one) drive?

BUT, since S.M.A.R.T. now reports no errors, why should either the
vendor or Seagate replace it?

Even if it craps out altogether, it's part of a RaidZ2 pool (two drives
can fail without data loss), and I do have a spare with which I can
replace it.

Perce
  #6  
Old July 3rd 19, 12:10 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Grant Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default S.M.A.R.T. reports bad sectors, but badblocks no errors?

On 7/2/19 4:17 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
This is a brand-new Seagate drive, so do I return it for replacement, or
assume that the problem is now solved (false alarm perhaps), or wait
till it acts up again and get it replaced by Seagate by a "refurbished"
(i.e., tested more thoroughly than a brand-new one) drive?


Depending how convenient it is to exchange, I'd be inclined to feign
ignorance and say it's not working and ask for a replacement.
Especially if it's a moderately convenient brick and mortar store.

An online acquisition would depend on their return policies, shipping,
time frames, etc.

BUT, since S.M.A.R.T. now reports no errors, why should either the
vendor or Seagate replace it?


Ya. Of course it does. That's going to make it even harder to get a
replacement from Seagate.

Even if it craps out altogether, it's part of a RaidZ2 pool (two drives
can fail without data loss), and I do have a spare with which I can
replace it.


Depending on how annoying it will be to exchange, I'd likely go ahead
and put it in the ZFS pool and deal with the drive in the future.

I will say that I'd be inclined to run SpinRite on the drive before
putting it into the pool. I'd probably crank it up to a level 4 or 5.
The high level being a desire to exercise the crap out of the drive for
fear that it's might have infant mortality. I'd rather it die before
putting it into service than after.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Seagate drive check utility reports "errors in metadatea file records, other errors critical errors in metadata.." [email protected] Storage (alternative) 0 February 3rd 06 04:48 AM
bad blocks found but SMART reports zero reallocated sectors IronFelix Storage (alternative) 5 January 28th 06 03:16 AM
Memtest86 reports no error at the store, but reports errors here!! Admin General 12 September 13th 05 10:32 AM
XFS and bad sectors/badblocks scott Storage (alternative) 0 February 28th 04 11:43 PM
A7N8X Reports errors Baxter Asus Motherboards 4 June 29th 03 11:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.