J. Roeleveld wrote: > On Tuesday, July 01, 2014 06:52:10 AM Mick wrote: >> On Sunday 29 Jun 2014 13:05:04 Rich Freeman wrote: >>> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> 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. > I think a write to that sector should force a relocation. > > -- > Joost > >
I think you are right Joost. I should have tried some fixes that COULD be destructive to see if a) it fixes it and b) the data lives, other than the bad part at least. I forgot to do that and really wasn't sure how to do it either. One person posted a lot of info about it but it was a bit deep for me. It would have required some reading and because of health issues, I can't tackle that much at one time right now. What I did tho. I got the new drive, rsynced the data from old drive to new drive. Removed the LVM stuff from the old drive. I used dd to erase the whole old drive, which took a while for 3TBs. o_O After that, I ran the test. It came back fine. Check out this snippet: SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_Description Status Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Short offline Completed without error 00% 16499 - # 2 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 16498 - # 3 Short offline Completed without error 00% 16475 - # 4 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 16466 - # 5 Extended offline Aborted by host 90% 16461 - # 6 Extended offline Completed: read failure 60% 16451 2905482560 # 7 Extended offline Completed: read failure 60% 16432 2905482560 # 8 Extended offline Completed: read failure 60% 16427 2905482560 # 9 Extended offline Completed: read failure 60% 16394 2905482560 #10 Extended offline Completed: read failure 60% 16389 2905482560 #11 Short offline Completed without error 00% 16380 - #12 Extended offline Completed: read failure 60% 16365 2905482560 #13 Extended offline Completed: read failure 60% 16352 2905482560 #14 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 8044 - #15 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 3121 - #16 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 1548 - #17 Short offline Completed without error 00% 1141 - #18 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 719 - #19 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 525 - #20 Short offline Completed without error 00% 516 - #21 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 18 - 7 of 7 failed self-tests are outdated by newer successful extended offline self-test # 2 Note the very last line. You can see all the failures but the last line says the drive is good to go since the drive passed after the bad ones. So, while I'm not holding my breath, that is what SMART says. It may blow smoke and make horrible noises next week but right now, it says it is OK. In the end, it seems something has to write to that specific sector and then the drive will reallocate/move/whatever so that the bad part isn't used anymore. It seems dd did that but I bet there are other tools that could do it without losing data other than what is in the bad spot of course. That's my simple idea at least. Hope that helps. I wish I could have done the other stuff and kept notes on commands and such and then post the results. That MAY have helped someone in the future. My brain ain't what it used to be. ;-) Dale :-) :-)
