On Sun, 26 Jan 2014, Chris Murphy wrote:
I accept that. But since there are two sector sizes, one URE does not represent the same amount of data loss.
This is your interpretation of the claim. My interpretation of the data is that you will get an URE for every 10^14 bits read. How many data bits that are lost by this URE is not important, either you lose 512 bytes or 4096 bytes. The bit error rate is still calcluated on total amount read, regardless of how many bits are when this URE happens.
In data communication (ethernet for instance), we say the bit error rate is 10^-12. When you get a bit error, you're going to lose the entire packet. The size of the packet doesn't count in the error rate calculation. I don't see why HDDs would be different.
The bit error rate is one thing, the consequence of the bit error and how much data is lost is another thing. You insist that these are directly coupled.
Fine, but if you accept that the probability of URE is the same between conventional and AF disks, you accept that there are more bits being lost on AF disks than conventional disks. Yet the available data says the opposite is true.
Where exactly in the available data does it say that? -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@xxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
