Neil Bothwick <[email protected]> [14-07-27 12:32]: > On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 12:12:47 +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > > On the one hand, the surface test (extended offline and such) aborts > > as soon the first read fgailure happens. > > > > On the other hand it is said: If the count of bad sectors increases > > over time it is time to change the hd. > > > > How can the second happen, if the first is true??? > > My understanding is that the test only aborts if the error is severe > enough to force it to do so. A simple bad block can be skipped and the > rest of the drive tested. > > I've had a couple of drives get to the stage where SMART tests abort at > an error and in both cases the manufacturer replaced them without > question. > > > -- > Neil Bothwick > > If at first you do succeed, try to hide your astonishment.
Hi Dale, hi Neil, thanks for the infos. But it is slightly off the point I tried to explain (I am no native english speaker...sorry...:) Suppose - as in my case - I have not yert managed to urge the hd to map the bad sector off... Now...all tests abort after scanning 10% of the disk. Disk health status is reported as "PASSED"...cause only one bad sector has been found. But 90% of the space of the disk has never been scanned. Is this an implementation fault? And if YES...is it the implementation of the firmware? And: Is it my firmware or the one of the drive? ;) Best regards, mcc
