[gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[Alan Grimes]

I overhauled my computer today, found two things...

My waterblock is clogged again, down to a trickle of flow, not bad
enough to be dangerous at idle but I've had to order some fresh O-rings
from Germany and will need to rebuild the damn thing again.

Some of the nickel plating is scraped off down in the micro channels,
and the flow-restrictor is stainless steel, which is a high-nickel
steel... All the fittings in the loop are also nickel. (I was trying to
minimize things that would galvanically react to each other...)

BLEH...

The other discovery was that my /home drive is a 3.0 tb Toshiba unit
from 2014... man time flies!!! =P This means that the thing should
probably be replaced due to being old as hell...

I'm not going to get too excited about 24 reallocated sectors on a drive
this large... Actually I have a drive in my NAS that's going down hill
rapidly, I think the power supply to the slot its in is weaker than the
others and well...

Any thoughts about running a drive this old, and what I should be
looking at as a replacement?

Root is a 256gb SATA Samsung SSD, no concerns about lifespan on that
drive. I hadn't heard of M.2 yet when I bought it...


/dev/sdb1      2884152536 955486476 1782136424  35% /home

SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE     
UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate     0x000b   083   083   016    Pre-fail 
Always       -       262570
  2 Throughput_Performance  0x0005   139   139   054    Pre-fail 
Offline      -       72
  3 Spin_Up_Time            0x0007   159   159   024    Pre-fail 
Always       -       405 (Average 316)
  4 Start_Stop_Count        0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age  
Always       -       244
  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   005    Pre-fail 
Always       -       24
  7 Seek_Error_Rate         0x000b   100   100   067    Pre-fail 
Always       -       0
  8 Seek_Time_Performance   0x0005   119   119   020    Pre-fail 
Offline      -       35
  9 Power_On_Hours          0x0012   093   093   000    Old_age  
Always       -       53677
 10 Spin_Retry_Count        0x0013   100   100   060    Pre-fail 
Always       -       0
 12 Power_Cycle_Count       0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
Always       -       243
192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
Always       -       271
193 Load_Cycle_Count        0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age  
Always       -       271
194 Temperature_Celsius     0x0002   181   181   000    Old_age  
Always       -       33 (Min/Max 14/44)
196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
Always       -       27
197 Current_Pending_Sector  0x0022   029   029   000    Old_age  
Always       -       1456
198 Offline_Uncorrectable   0x0008   100   100   000    Old_age  
Offline      -       0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count    0x000a   200   200   000    Old_age  
Always       -       0


-- 
The vaccine is a LIE. 
#EggCrisis     
White is the new Kulak.
Powers are not rights.

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[Hund]

>My waterblock is clogged again, down to a trickle of flow, not bad
>enough to be dangerous at idle but I've had to order some fresh O-rings
>from Germany and will need to rebuild the damn thing again.

Unless you're a hardcore overclocker, there's really no reason to bother with it, especially not today with modern hardware that's running cool with pretty weak cooling to begin with. :)

>Any thoughts about running a drive this old, and what I should be
>looking at as a replacement?

No matter how old or new your disk is, keep your backups current and in working shape.

If it's old, I would just keep an extra eye on the S.M.A.R.T. status and replace it when it's getting close to dying. If you're lucky it will last you for a long time and if you're unlucky it could die any day, which is also to true for any disk.

>Root is a 256gb SATA Samsung SSD, no concerns about lifespan on that
>drive. I hadn't heard of M.2 yet when I bought it...

A SSD is just fine. You're not gaining any performance with a M.2 disk anyway.

--
Hund

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[antlists]

On 18/02/2021 08:20, Hund wrote:
>> Any thoughts about running a drive this old, and what I should be
>> looking at as a replacement?
> No matter how old or new your disk is, keep your backups current and in working shape.
> 
> If it's old, I would just keep an extra eye on the S.M.A.R.T. status and replace it when it's getting close to dying. If you're lucky it will last you for a long time and if you're unlucky it could die any day, which is also to true for any disk.
> 
I guess my Barracudas are that old ...

I'd just worry about the pre-fail warnings. I guess you need to replace 
the drive, and that one's probably fine for short term backups - you 
should always have a couple of backups lying around, so this could be 
your daily incremental say.

Cheers,
Wol

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday, 18 February 2021 08:20:54 GMT Hund wrote:

> A SSD is just fine. You're not gaining any performance with a M.2 disk
> anyway.

Sorry, but that just isn't true. The difference is dramatic. I speak from 
experience.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[J. Roeleveld]

On Thursday, February 18, 2021 12:10:45 PM CET Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Thursday, 18 February 2021 08:20:54 GMT Hund wrote:
> > A SSD is just fine. You're not gaining any performance with a M.2 disk
> > anyway.
> 
> Sorry, but that just isn't true. The difference is dramatic. I speak from
> experience.

Provided the M.2 is using NVME instead of SATA

And also decent specced. (I've seen badly specced NVME models)

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[Michael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3605 bytes --]

On Thursday, 18 February 2021 06:54:29 GMT Alan Grimes wrote:

> The other discovery was that my /home drive is a 3.0 tb Toshiba unit
> from 2014... man time flies!!! =P This means that the thing should
> probably be replaced due to being old as hell...

I've got disks spinning around for more than 10 years before yours had 
started.  One has been showing similar errors for almost half its life.


> I'm not going to get too excited about 24 reallocated sectors on a drive
> this large... Actually I have a drive in my NAS that's going down hill
> rapidly, I think the power supply to the slot its in is weaker than the
> others and well...
> 
> Any thoughts about running a drive this old, and what I should be
> looking at as a replacement?

I can't advise on a replacement, other than say check if any candidate uses 
Shingled Magnetic Recording (SMR) technology and avoid it unless your use case 
involves writing rarely, reading often.  Conventional drives use Perpendicular 
Magnetic Recording and will not suffer from the performance degradation of 
SMRs when written to frequently and extensively.


> Root is a 256gb SATA Samsung SSD, no concerns about lifespan on that
> drive. I hadn't heard of M.2 yet when I bought it...

You'll be able to replace your spinning SATA with an SSD SATA using AHCI over 
the same port.  You won't be able to get an M.2 NVMe (M-key socket 3) doing 
its magic without a PCIe 3.0x4 port on your MoBo.

Sadly my hardware is too old and it won't boot using NVMe.


> /dev/sdb1      2884152536 955486476 1782136424  35% /home
> 
> SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16
> Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
> ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE     
> UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
>   1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate     0x000b   083   083   016    Pre-fail 
> Always       -       262570
>   2 Throughput_Performance  0x0005   139   139   054    Pre-fail 
> Offline      -       72
>   3 Spin_Up_Time            0x0007   159   159   024    Pre-fail 
> Always       -       405 (Average 316)
>   4 Start_Stop_Count        0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age  
> Always       -       244
>   5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   005    Pre-fail 
> Always       -       24
>   7 Seek_Error_Rate         0x000b   100   100   067    Pre-fail 
> Always       -       0
>   8 Seek_Time_Performance   0x0005   119   119   020    Pre-fail 
> Offline      -       35
>   9 Power_On_Hours          0x0012   093   093   000    Old_age  
> Always       -       53677
>  10 Spin_Retry_Count        0x0013   100   100   060    Pre-fail 
> Always       -       0
>  12 Power_Cycle_Count       0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
> Always       -       243
> 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
> Always       -       271
> 193 Load_Cycle_Count        0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age  
> Always       -       271
> 194 Temperature_Celsius     0x0002   181   181   000    Old_age  
> Always       -       33 (Min/Max 14/44)
> 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
> Always       -       27
> 197 Current_Pending_Sector  0x0022   029   029   000    Old_age  
> Always       -       1456

This value is worth considering further.  Start with a backup of your data, 
but do not overwrite your older backups.

Then consider zeroing the defective sectors.

https://www.thomas-krenn.com/en/wiki/
Analyzing_a_Faulty_Hard_Disk_using_Smartctl

With 1456 pending sectors you'll be there for a while.  Alternatively ditch it 
and get a new drive as you intend to do anyway.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[John Covici]

On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:12:02 -0500,
Michael wrote:
> 
> [1  <text/plain; UTF-8 (7bit)>]
> On Thursday, 18 February 2021 06:54:29 GMT Alan Grimes wrote:
> 
> > The other discovery was that my /home drive is a 3.0 tb Toshiba unit
> > from 2014... man time flies!!! =P This means that the thing should
> > probably be replaced due to being old as hell...
> 
> I've got disks spinning around for more than 10 years before yours had 
> started.  One has been showing similar errors for almost half its life.
> 
> 
> > I'm not going to get too excited about 24 reallocated sectors on a drive
> > this large... Actually I have a drive in my NAS that's going down hill
> > rapidly, I think the power supply to the slot its in is weaker than the
> > others and well...
> > 
> > Any thoughts about running a drive this old, and what I should be
> > looking at as a replacement?
> 
> I can't advise on a replacement, other than say check if any candidate uses 
> Shingled Magnetic Recording (SMR) technology and avoid it unless your use case 
> involves writing rarely, reading often.  Conventional drives use Perpendicular 
> Magnetic Recording and will not suffer from the performance degradation of 
> SMRs when written to frequently and extensively.
> 
> 
> > Root is a 256gb SATA Samsung SSD, no concerns about lifespan on that
> > drive. I hadn't heard of M.2 yet when I bought it...
> 
> You'll be able to replace your spinning SATA with an SSD SATA using AHCI over 
> the same port.  You won't be able to get an M.2 NVMe (M-key socket 3) doing 
> its magic without a PCIe 3.0x4 port on your MoBo.
> 
> Sadly my hardware is too old and it won't boot using NVMe.
> 
> 
> > /dev/sdb1      2884152536 955486476 1782136424  35% /home
> > 
> > SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16
> > Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
> > ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE     
> > UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
> >   1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate     0x000b   083   083   016    Pre-fail 
> > Always       -       262570
> >   2 Throughput_Performance  0x0005   139   139   054    Pre-fail 
> > Offline      -       72
> >   3 Spin_Up_Time            0x0007   159   159   024    Pre-fail 
> > Always       -       405 (Average 316)
> >   4 Start_Stop_Count        0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age  
> > Always       -       244
> >   5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   005    Pre-fail 
> > Always       -       24
> >   7 Seek_Error_Rate         0x000b   100   100   067    Pre-fail 
> > Always       -       0
> >   8 Seek_Time_Performance   0x0005   119   119   020    Pre-fail 
> > Offline      -       35
> >   9 Power_On_Hours          0x0012   093   093   000    Old_age  
> > Always       -       53677
> >  10 Spin_Retry_Count        0x0013   100   100   060    Pre-fail 
> > Always       -       0
> >  12 Power_Cycle_Count       0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
> > Always       -       243
> > 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
> > Always       -       271
> > 193 Load_Cycle_Count        0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age  
> > Always       -       271
> > 194 Temperature_Celsius     0x0002   181   181   000    Old_age  
> > Always       -       33 (Min/Max 14/44)
> > 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age  
> > Always       -       27
> > 197 Current_Pending_Sector  0x0022   029   029   000    Old_age  
> > Always       -       1456
> 
> This value is worth considering further.  Start with a backup of your data, 
> but do not overwrite your older backups.
> 
> Then consider zeroing the defective sectors.
> 
> https://www.thomas-krenn.com/en/wiki/
> Analyzing_a_Faulty_Hard_Disk_using_Smartctl
> 
> With 1456 pending sectors you'll be there for a while.  Alternatively ditch it 
> and get a new drive as you intend to do anyway.

Or, get spinwrite and when the beta comes out, which is very soon now,
you may be able to fix your drive!

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici wb2una
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday, 18 February 2021 11:12:44 GMT J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Thursday, February 18, 2021 12:10:45 PM CET Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Thursday, 18 February 2021 08:20:54 GMT Hund wrote:
> > > A SSD is just fine. You're not gaining any performance with a M.2 disk
> > > anyway.
> > 
> > Sorry, but that just isn't true. The difference is dramatic. I speak from
> > experience.
> 
> Provided the M.2 is using NVME instead of SATA

I assumed the two terms were interchangeable. Is that not so?

> And also decent specced. (I've seen badly specced NVME models)

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[Frank Steinmetzger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 636 bytes --]

Am Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 08:14:59PM +0000 schrieb Peter Humphrey:

> > Provided the M.2 is using NVME instead of SATA
> 
> I assumed the two terms were interchangeable. Is that not so?

M.2 is the physical connector. SATA and NMVE are logical protocols (well,
there are also SATA-specific connectors %-) ).

Depending on the “key” (a gap in the connector), an M.2 slot supports either
of them or even both.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.2

-- 
Gruß | Greetings | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

I have many solutions. Alas, they don’t fit to my problems.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] routine maintenance.

[Alan Grimes]

Peter Humphrey wrote:
> I assumed the two terms were interchangeable. Is that not so?

SATA: based on the IDE legacy over a serial bus, caps out at about
530mb/sec,
NVME: connects directly to a PCIe 4x bus, no overhead of any kind, caps
out at ~2gb/sec...

(legacy HDD:  50mb/sec ideal sequential read; ~1mb/sec at best under
windows 10 trying to round-robin between 10 different read requests
forcing the head to seek between that many sites on the disk, grabbing a
few kb each time..)

-- 
The vaccine is a LIE. 
#EggCrisis     
White is the new Kulak.
Powers are not rights.