On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Adam Carter wrote:
>
> TFA doesn't mention drive vendors. Does "others" in the "fingering others"
> statement refer to other SMART metrics?
Backblaze published their vendor stats recently. Hitachi drives were
the best, followed by WD. Then WAY behind those two w
I find the confirmation of the theory, and the actual response of vendor
implementations, useful. Using empirical evidence based on a significant
sample size achieves that. The alternative is to make the assumption that
the theory and the vendor implementation is correct, and I only do this
when i
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
wrote:
> Am 13.11.2014 um 01:01 schrieb Adam Carter:
>
> "Backblaze's analysis of nearly 40,000 drives showed five SMART metrics that
> correlate strongly with impending disk drive failure:
>
> SMART 5 - Reallocated_Sector_Count.
> SMART 187 -
Am 13.11.2014 um 01:01 schrieb Adam Carter:
> "Backblaze's analysis of nearly 40,000 drives showed five SMART
> metrics that correlate strongly with impending disk drive failure:
>
> * SMART 5 - Reallocated_Sector_Count.
> * SMART 187 - Reported_Uncorrectable_Errors.
> * SMART 188 - Command_T
"Backblaze's analysis of nearly 40,000 drives showed five SMART metrics
that correlate strongly with impending disk drive failure:
- SMART 5 - Reallocated_Sector_Count.
- SMART 187 - Reported_Uncorrectable_Errors.
- SMART 188 - Command_Timeout.
- SMART 197 - Current_Pending_Sector_Coun
5 matches
Mail list logo