Really any decent monitoring solution can poll for SMART data as long as it's being exposed by the host via SNMP.
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:07 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <[email protected]> wrote: > I would like to see more inclusion of the BIOS for the monitoring like with > our lenovo thinkservers. I dont know if the consumer would understand having > two IPs coming into the same port, but hardware monitoring separate from the > OS is the way to go, too many variables. Some of our older ESXi stuff we > have no way of knowing if the drive is croaking without rebooting the host > into bios. > At a bare minimum on the consumer market, boot time halts on excessive smart > errors would at least get the consumer to know that Johnny the geek needs to > take a look at it > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Normally a rotation drive will start throwing errors or making noises >> when it's on it's deathbed. Easy to hear at home, but impossible to >> hear in a datacenter or server closet. An SSD when it dies is often >> just "vanishes" in catastrophic fashion. Hopefully you/someone is >> watching SMART levels/errors and can swap it out before then. >> >> This brings up another issue in the near-term / future, where home >> users are going to be pushed more and more into either external >> storage sync or cloud storage services to help mitigate SSD failure. >> >> It would be nice if $company could include wear alerts in their >> operating systems to notify users about possible pending failure, but >> that makes it harder to sell backup services if you know when it's >> coming ;) >> >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Other than price, which will be more reliable over the long haul? >> > >> > Ever since I first used a flash chip back in the early 2000s the worry >> > about >> > wearing out the storage elements has always been on my mind. But with >> > the >> > wear leveling techniques built into SSDs and the increase in storage >> > cell >> > robustness, that may not be a legit fear any more. You still have ESD >> > failure modes but that would apply to rotating disks. You can put the >> > disks >> > from a failed drive into a good drive and recover from a disaster >> > sometimes. >> > But other than that, it would seem to me that the rotating media is more >> > likely to fail. >> > >> > From: Eric Kuhnke >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 12:06 PM >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rotating Media >> > >> > Large scale backup storage? >> > >> > I can build a server with 40 * 8TB 3.5" HGST spinning 7200 rpm drives, >> > divided up into several Linux mdadm RAID6 arrays with hotspares, for >> > considerably less money than the same capacity built out of 1TB 2.5" >> > SSDs. >> > >> > There is now a Samsung 15TB SSD that costs ten thousand dollars... >> > >> > http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/8/1/12342696/samsung-pm1633a-ssd-15tb-storage-drive-specs-price >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Is there a good reason to continue to use rotating media going forward? >> > >> > > > > > > -- > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as > part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
