From: Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] New hard drive. Is this normal? It looks like a connect problem.
Date: Tue, 6 May 2025 18:30:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bb87b6d8-6198-7211-4fc5-3f9592bc4130@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59aa965f-a298-8f42-5df3-bd42278bd94e@gmail.com>
Dale wrote:
> Michael wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 6 May 2025 13:59:16 British Summer Time Dale wrote:
>>> Michael wrote:
>>>> Initially I'd be suspecting the SATA cable/port, but if you tried another
>>>> MoBo did you also try a different SATA cable?
>>>>
>>>> Were the ports you connected to compatible with SATA 3 revision capable of
>>>> 6Gb/s? Notwithstanding the warnings and errors you'd want the highest
>>>> transfer speed you can get on a new drive.
>>> I think the speed issue might be that external enclosure I used. I've
>>> got two of those I think. The other external enclosures work at full
>>> speed tho.
>> Try one of your SATA 3 enclosures.
>>
>> Try a different SATA/eSATA cable depending on connecting the drive internally/
>> externally.
> I was only using the enclosure to test the drive while connected to my
> main rig. I'm not planning to leave it in there once the testing is
> done. I'm not one to buy a drive and put data on it right away. I test
> first then once it is proven to be good, then I put data on it. When I
> saw the slow data speed connection, I suspected the enclosure, never
> used it to test a drive before, so I moved the drive to my NAS box rig
> where I could connect it directly and remove any doubt about something
> in the middle causing problems. When I put it on the NAS box, I used
> the same power cable and data cable that I use to update my backups and
> it works without error. I don't see how it can be the data cable, power
> or mobo in this case. All those work fine when doing backups. It
> powers 4 hard drives in that setup. Soon to be 5 drives.
>
>>> The concern I have mostly is the slow part when hooked to the NAS mobo
>>> directly. I have a good size power supply for that old thing. It
>>> likely runs at about a 20% load most of the time. The most excitement
>>> it sees is when I do OS updates and backup updates at the same time.
>>> LOL I included that first error just in case it may be relevant to the
>>> one from the NAS box about being slow.
>> I think the messages you received show the drive is slow to initialize, which
>> could be an issue with low power, or poor cable connection.
>>
>>
>>> When I did some searches for that error, I never found a real answer to
>>> the question. Is that normal for some drives or a sign of future
>>> failure? It's a 20TB Seagate EXOS Enterprise drive. Maybe it has a
>>> extra platter which takes longer to spin up or something and it is
>>> normal. Then again, maybe it is a weak motor that is about to fail.
>>> Some stuff I found claimed it was a kernel error. I've never seen that
>>> on either of my systems and I been using those same kernels for a long
>>> time. As most know, I have quite a few large drives here. o_O
>>>
>>> As far as I know, all my rigs are SATA 3 ready.
>> If you connect a SATA 3 capable drive to a SATA 3 controller you should get
>> SATA 3 speeds. In the messages you shared I SATA 1 and SATA 2 speeds only.
>> If you've tried different cables and the SATA ports are definitely SATA 3,
>> then the problem must be related to the drive.
>>
>> You could try disconnecting all other spinning drives from the MoBo, connect
>> ST20000NM007D and boot with the latest adminCD to see what messages you get.
>
> The only other drive connected is a SSD for the OS. As mentioned above,
> this is what I use to connect a 4 drive setup for my backups. I even
> use the same power connector. I also used one of the same data cables.
> I might add, I just tested a 16TB drive and it worked without error of
> any kind. It's in the safe while I figure out which drive, 16TB or
> 20TB, is going to be added to my backup drives and which will be added
> to my main rig.
>
> So far, this is the first drive I've ever seen this 'slow to respond'
> message with before. Since I've never seen it before, curious as to
> what it means exactly and is it normal? Searching didn't help. Some
> claim kernel, others claim something else.
>
> As soon as this test completes, another few hours to go yet, I'm going
> to power cycle the drive again to see what it does. I may cycle it a
> few times to see if it is a consistent problem as well.
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)
>
As a update, the long SMART test finished without error. I cycled the
drive off for a few minutes, to be sure the kernel has finished its
house cleaning. When I powered it back up, this was in messages.
May 6 18:07:36 nas kernel: ata4: link is slow to respond, please be
patient (ready=0)
May 6 18:07:41 nas kernel: ata4: found unknown device (class 0)
May 6 18:07:41 nas last message buffered 1 times
May 6 18:07:41 nas kernel: ata4: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123
SControl 300)
May 6 18:07:41 nas kernel: ata4: link online but 1 devices
misclassified, retrying
May 6 18:07:46 nas kernel: ata4: link is slow to respond, please be
patient (ready=0)
May 6 18:07:51 nas kernel: ata4: found unknown device (class 0)
May 6 18:07:51 nas last message buffered 1 times
May 6 18:07:51 nas kernel: ata4: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123
SControl 300)
May 6 18:07:51 nas kernel: ata4: link online but 1 devices
misclassified, retrying
May 6 18:07:57 nas kernel: ata4: link is slow to respond, please be
patient (ready=0)
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: ata4: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123
SControl 300)
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: ata4.00: ATA-11: ST20000NM007D-3DJ103, SN05,
max UDMA/133
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: ata4.00: 39063650304 sectors, multi 16:
LBA48 NCQ (depth 32), AA
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: ata4.00: Features: NCQ-sndrcv
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: ata4.00: configured for UDMA/133
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: scsi 3:0:0:0: Direct-Access ATA
ST20000NM007D-3D SN05 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 0
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] 39063650304 512-byte
logical blocks: (20.0 TB/18.2 TiB)
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] 4096-byte physical blocks
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Write cache: enabled, read
cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Preferred minimum I/O size
4096 bytes
May 6 18:07:59 nas kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI removable disk
I ran a hdparm test. I wanted to see as accurately as I could what the
speed was. I got this.
root@nas ~ # hdparm -tT /dev/sdb
/dev/sdb:
Timing cached reads: 7106 MB in 2.00 seconds = 3554.48 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 802 MB in 3.00 seconds = 267.03 MB/sec
root@nas ~ #
From what I've seen of other drives, that appears to be SATA 3 or the
faster speed. So, it is slow to respond but connects and works fine.
My question still remains tho. Do I need to return this drive because
this is a sign of upcoming failure or is it normal and just carry on
with the drive?
Dale
:-) :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-06 23:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-05 21:15 [gentoo-user] New hard drive. Is this normal? It looks like a connect problem Dale
2025-05-06 12:12 ` Michael
2025-05-06 12:59 ` Dale
2025-05-06 14:31 ` Michael
2025-05-06 20:51 ` Dale
2025-05-06 23:08 ` Wol
2025-05-07 0:16 ` Dale
2025-05-06 23:30 ` Dale [this message]
2025-05-07 8:18 ` Michael
2025-05-07 15:13 ` Dale
2025-05-10 15:53 ` Dale
2025-05-10 18:52 ` Michael
2025-05-12 8:11 ` Dale
2025-05-12 11:14 ` Michael
2025-05-13 6:30 ` Dale
2025-05-12 22:34 ` Frank Steinmetzger
2025-05-13 6:05 ` Dale
2025-05-13 8:30 ` Michael
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bb87b6d8-6198-7211-4fc5-3f9592bc4130@gmail.com \
--to=rdalek1967@gmail.com \
--cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox