Well just an update, dd did fail. I was able to install dd_recover and ran it over the weekend. I have now booted up, and I am running without errors on the replacement drive. Thanks to everyone for their input. -Troy -----Original Message----- From: redhat-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:redhat-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Canfield Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 7:26 AM To: General Red Hat Linux discussion list Subject: Re: Failing Disk George Magklaras wrote: > Jim, I disagree with you. I would be interested to know how dd would > handle read errors on the failing drive. :-) Have you completed many > rescue operations with drives whose reliability is questionable > without hickups only with dd??? > > If his failing drive is in a bad state and is likely to give > persistent I/O errors, doing a dd the way you describe it in your > number list will either abort the read operation or copy things > inconsistently. Again I would substitute dd with dd_rescue. If his > blocks are OK, dd_rescue will behave exactly as dd. If the blocks on > the origin drive are broken, it will persist until it copies as much > data as possible. > You are right, I mentioned previously he may have problems if the drive was actually failing, dd_rescue never even came to mind. Thanks for pointing it out. -Jim >> >> >> Mark, >> >> Did I give bad advice? I have used dd quite a bit and never had any >> problems. Granted I am always copying to identical drives. Now >> that I >> think about it, it would be important to have identical disk geomerty >> (cylinders, heads, sectors). Sorry Troy, guess I'm exposing my >> ignorance. >> :) >> >> -Jim > > > > -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
