similar to: HDD badblocks

On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Matt Garman <matthew.garman at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, I'd want > to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check ought to turn up > something, and in my experience, that's enough for a manufacturer to do a > warranty replacement. I agree with Matt. Go

Il 17/01/2016 19:36, Alessandro Baggi ha scritto: > Il 17/01/2016 18:46, Brandon Vincent ha scritto: >> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Matt Garman >> <matthew.garman at gmail.com> wrote: >>> I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, >>> I'd want >>> to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check

On 1/19/2016 2:24 PM, Warren Young wrote: > It?s dying. Replace it now. agreed > On a modern hard disk, you should*never* see bad sectors, because the drive is busy hiding all the bad sectors it does find, then telling you everything is fine. thats not actually true. the drive will report 'bad sector' if you try and read data that the drive simply can't read. you

Hi... I really hope that somebody can help me to brainstorm this problem. Please let me describe my enviornment. Environment --------------- Fedora 16 x86_64(fully up-to-date) Wine 1.5.1 32bit and noarch binaries only Nvidia GPU - GTS 450 Nvidia Driver - 295.40 (including 32bit libraries) I've installed Perfectworld International under wine. Everything was running fine until the most recent

On Jan 17, 2016, at 9:59 AM, Alessandro Baggi <alessandro.baggi at gmail.com> wrote: > > On sdb there are not problem but with sda: > > 1) First run badblocks reports 28 badblocks on disk > 2) Second run badblocks reports 32 badblocks > 3) Third reports 102 badblocks > 4) Last run reports 92 badblocks. It?s dying. Replace it now. On a modern hard disk, you should

Have you ran a "long" smart test on the drive? Smartctl -t long device I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, I'd want to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check ought to turn up something, and in my experience, that's enough for a manufacturer to do a warranty replacement. On Jan 17, 2016 11:00, "Alessandro Baggi"

Il 18/01/2016 12:09, Chris Murphy ha scritto: > What is the result for each drive? > > smartctl -l scterc <dev> > > > Chris Murphy > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > . > SCT Error Recovery Control command not supported

Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016, 4:39 AM Alessandro Baggi > <alessandro.baggi at gmail.com> > wrote: >> Il 18/01/2016 12:09, Chris Murphy ha scritto: >> > What is the result for each drive? >> > >> > smartctl -l scterc <dev> >> > >> SCT Error Recovery Control command not supported >> > The drive is

On 01/19/2016 06:46 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > Hence, bad sectors accumulate. And the consequence of this often > doesn't get figured out until a user looks at kernel messages and sees > a bunch of hard link resets.... The standard Unix way of refreshing the disk contents is with badblocks' non-destructive read-write test (badblocks -n or as the -cc option to e2fsck, for

what file system are you using?? ssd drives have different characteristics that need to be accomadated (including a relatively slow write process which is obvious as soon as the buffer is full), and never, never put a swap partition on it, the high activity will wear it out rather quickly.? might also check cables, often a problem particularly if they are older sata cables being run at a possibly

Il 17/01/2016 18:46, Brandon Vincent ha scritto: > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Matt Garman <matthew.garman at gmail.com> wrote: >> I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, I'd want >> to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check ought to turn up >> something, and in my experience, that's enough for a

I've got a 1Tb USB disc that appears to be dying - eg it took about 10 days (!) to run 'badblocks -nsv /dev/sdc' and it only did less than 2% in that time. Read access became _really_ slow. So there's definitely something amiss and I've got it offline. There's no drama about the content as I have other backups and I'm resigned to junking the thing, but I'm curious

All, Trying to figure out how to deal with, I assume, a dying disk that's unfortunately on / (ext3). Getting errors similar to: Dec 31 20:44:30 mybox kernel: hdb: dma_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error } Dec 31 20:44:30 mybox kernel: hdb: dma_intr: error=0x40 { UncorrectableError }, LBAsect=163423, high=0, low=163423, sector=163360 Dec 31 20:44:30 mybox kernel: end_request:

On 01/20/2016 01:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016, 7:17 AM Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote: > >> The standard Unix way of refreshing the disk contents is with >> badblocks' non-destructive read-write test (badblocks -n or as the >> -cc option to e2fsck, for ext2/3/4 filesystems). > > This isn't applicable to RAID, which is what

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Chris Murphy <lists at colorremedies.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Bowie Bailey <Bowie_Bailey at buc.com> wrote: >> I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. > > I'm going to guess that there are no IDE drives that have 4096 byte > physical sectors, but it's worth confirming you don't have

On 08/09/2017 10:46 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > If it's a bad sector problem, you'd write to sector 17066160 and see if the > drive complies or spits back a write error. It looks like a bad sector in > that the same LBA is reported each time but I've only ever seen this with > both a read error and a UNC error. So I'm not sure it's a bad sector. > > What is

I am building a new system using an Kingston 240GB SSD drive I pulled from my notebook (when I had to upgrade to a 500GB SSD drive). Centos install went fine and ran for a couple days then got errors on the console. Here is an example: [168176.995064] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] tag#14 FAILED Result: hostbyte=DID_BAD_TARGET driverbyte=DRIVER_OK [168177.004050] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] tag#14 CDB: Read(10)

Hi, Recently I've decided to play with gjournal. Main reason was a promise of avoiding full fsck check after unclean shutdown. I've successfuly configured gjournal on existing filesystems (all UFS). And then it happened - my system had a power failure. After boot, it forced me to run fsck manualy. Nothing special, I did it before... But this time it failed on gjournaled disks.

I decided, after the last discussion of smartd and S.M.A.R.T. disks, to take a look in my /var/log/messages, and I'm seeing fair bit of this: Sep 10 20:11:23 mhrichter smartd[3361]: Device: /dev/sda, 4294967295 Offline uncorrectable sectors Sep 10 20:41:23 mhrichter smartd[3361]: Device: /dev/hdb, 21 Currently unreadable (pending) sectors Sep 10 20:41:24 mhrichter smartd[3361]: Device:

Hi, I get the below from dmesg. The server seems to run fine, but it does worry me. What should I do? Other than take a backup.. :-) hda: dma_timer_expiry: dma status == 0x21 hda: DMA timeout error hda: dma timeout error: status=0xd0 { Busy } ide: failed opcode was: unknown hda: DMA disabled ide0: reset: success hda: dma_timer_expiry: dma status == 0x21 hda: dma_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady