From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10BFF13877A for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 10:56:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4872EE099E; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 10:56:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com (mail-wi0-f182.google.com [209.85.212.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D8B2E08FE for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 10:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id bs8so7522571wib.15 for ; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 03:56:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ct7JPRZlwDI5gWm9Nc56szv7KiD5o/C5k2RBLK56dcQ=; b=xZR9wnKGNwSXfHpv6/rQZCT1oB64JiTw/odsXSqlLAAqmlimHYgxXKDAbOuT7S/Ber Wgt+RsbyzDCrk30BRJWYKreURwca4U892rHteACoNNyMcsXQtsH2KJc3U+eahXjK0mNM NpCsqtDboa4ZpBIhbkCN6RMwdSOSGsf96w1cidxSACgzT4Dc5Ap1bA7Fp5eiItusSO9u RYx29E+EpEkbf+fCMAeB36+u4+UR3gHhD4eoYfkxCqrp34nNYj3J9WGRXvdNEdXuDNyx 012/xBFlRtHx3GrCMKrongdiSlhDpfiQhyUqIcl9wUFc3xws0WQX231RUmPxALduPjWl 7WvA== X-Received: by 10.180.19.65 with SMTP id c1mr36229681wie.16.1404212164938; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 03:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.44] ([41.85.145.17]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id q11sm42044371wib.14.2014.07.01.03.56.03 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Jul 2014 03:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53B29390.2080003@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 12:55:12 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] smartctrl drive error @60% References: <53AA050F.4070907@gmail.com> <53AF99B6.7070809@gmail.com> <201407010652.12440.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201407010652.12440.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: f557b0a4-bb93-4033-8997-350592bf6f2b X-Archives-Hash: f031589834da38163432a9796c91fe7d On 01/07/2014 07:52, Mick wrote: > On Sunday 29 Jun 2014 13:05:04 Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Dale wrote: >>> What if I copied data to the drive until it was just about full. I'm >>> thinking like maybe 90 or 95% or so. If I do that and run the test >>> every few days, would it then catch a error after a few weeks or so of >>> testing? I realize no one knows with 100% certainty... >> >> As you already said, nobody knows with 100% certainty. >> >> In the failures I've experienced I'd expect it to start catching >> errors within a few days. However, on those drives the relocated >> sector count never increases, which suggests that the firmware never >> relocated those sectors when overwritten, which seems brain-dead to >> me. >> >> If the drive relocates the sectors, then conceivably it could go quite >> a long time until having errors, probably in an entirely different set >> of sectors. >> >> Even if it doesn't relocate, the reliability of the bad sectors could >> be high or low. >> >> Rich > > What triggers a relocation? I also have a drive which shows a sector > relocation pending, but for a few days now and after some tests that showed no > errors, it won't relocate it. > it's triggered by a write to the sector -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com