Re: Question about raid robustness when disk fails

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dnia 2010-01-25, pon o godzinie 18:51 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow pisze:
> The only values I would keep a close eye on is remapped sectors and
> pending sectors. Anything else gives nice graphs but I always feel is
> totaly useless. And even the pending sectors are != 0 on one drive
> while
> badblocks reports no errors on repeated passes. The drive just doesn't
> seem to reduce the count when it successfully remaps a sector. 

I read today that Samsungs show that behavior. Maybe this is the case?

-- 
Cheers
Michał (Saviq) Sawicz

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: To jest =?UTF-8?Q?cz=C4=99=C5=9B=C4=87?= =?UTF-8?Q?_wiadomo=C5=9Bci?= podpisana cyfrowo


[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux