On 12/19/08 2:51 PM, "Wojciech Puchar" <woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
wrote:

> which means that in 2 cases of 3 you ARE warned.

yes. but what do i do with a smart warning? the google paper indicates that
even they haven't figured it out yet, although they express some hope.

"Despite those strong correlations, we √ěnd that failure prediction models
based on SMART parameters alone are likely to be severely limited in their
prediction accuracy, given that a large fraction of our failed drives have
shown no SMART error signals whatsoever. This result suggests that SMART
models are more useful in predicting trends for large aggregate populations
than for individual components."

in managing my servers, it's the failure of individual components that
count.

considering also 1) false positives and 2) replacement comes with a finite
chance of causing service outage, it's not clear to me that replacing a disk
on the basis of a smart warning is prudent.

i'm not proposing any firm conclusions should be drawn. i started this by
saying "i'm not convinced that smart monitoring is of much value..." 


_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to