Bad Sectors
in [Help and Support]
|
From: Yousuf Khan on 19 Jan 2010 23:17 David B. wrote: > A smart report is useless, more often than not when I find a bad hard > drive. smart believes there is no problem with the drive, it's > unreliable at best. Trust me, you're wrong on this. I used to feel the same way as you, when I used to just take a cursory look at the overall SMART status and everything would always be "just fine". But the SMART raw data fields require human intelligence to interpret. And often you can spot a failing drive months before it actually fails. Lots of data points get recorded in the SMART logs that you wouldn't even be aware of during the normal operation of the drive, as the drive will handle them internally. Such things as stiction which is a failure of the drive to startup from standstill after power has been turned on. If the drive doesn't start right away, then the BIOS will just try a few more times, and usually it'll work on a subsequent attempt. However, this reattempt will get recorded in a running count on the SMART logs. If the running count keeps going up, then you may have a problem. In the old days, the only time you found out about stiction is if you started hearing a grinding noise from the drive when you started your computer. Yousuf Khan
From: Bruce Chambers on 19 Jan 2010 23:38 Yousuf Khan wrote: > David B. wrote: > > A smart report is useless, more often than not when I find a bad hard > > drive. smart believes there is no problem with the drive, it's > > unreliable at best. > > > Trust me, you're wrong on this. I used to feel the same way as you, when > I used to just take a cursory look at the overall SMART status and > everything would always be "just fine". But the SMART raw data fields > require human intelligence to interpret. And often you can spot a > failing drive months before it actually fails. Lots of data points get > recorded in the SMART logs that you wouldn't even be aware of during the > normal operation of the drive, as the drive will handle them internally. > > Such things as stiction which is a failure of the drive to startup from > standstill after power has been turned on. If the drive doesn't start > right away, then the BIOS will just try a few more times, and usually > it'll work on a subsequent attempt. However, this reattempt will get > recorded in a running count on the SMART logs. If the running count > keeps going up, then you may have a problem. In the old days, the only > time you found out about stiction is if you started hearing a grinding > noise from the drive when you started your computer. > > Yousuf Khan I'd have to "second" this assessment. Having seen the same error, I can only tell the OP: "Back up your data daily until you replace that drive." On those machines I on which I've seen those S.M.A.R.T. warnings, catastrophic hard drive failures invariably followed. Some hard drives lasted for a few days after the warnings first appeared, one lasted months, but some lasted only minutes. I suppose the one that lasted months could be considered a false alarm, as "months" hardly translate to "imminent," but, on the whole, I'd suggest you take the warnings seriously. For the background on S.M.A.R.T., start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Monitoring,_Analysis,_and_Reporting_Technology -- Bruce Chambers Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375 They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers. ~ Denis Diderot
From: Yousuf Khan on 20 Jan 2010 01:28 Bruce Chambers wrote: > I'd have to "second" this assessment. > > Having seen the same error, I can only tell the OP: "Back up your > data daily until you replace that drive." > > On those machines I on which I've seen those S.M.A.R.T. warnings, > catastrophic hard drive failures invariably followed. Some hard > drives lasted for a few days after the warnings first appeared, one > lasted months, but some lasted only minutes. I suppose the one that > lasted months could be considered a false alarm, as "months" hardly > translate to "imminent," but, on the whole, I'd suggest you take the > warnings seriously. Well, to tell you the truth, one of my drives has had a SMART warning on its stiction for years now. I've had other drives with zero SMART errors die before this drive. But they usually died due to an electronic failure, rather than mechanical, and SMART can't do anything about that. But I have seen other drives with lots of reallocated sectors, pending sectors, etc. which SMART was warning about, and those actually did die as predicted. So I'll say that the one that's lasted for years is a false positive. Yousuf Khan
From: Arno on 20 Jan 2010 03:40 In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage David B. <mail(a)nomail.net> wrote: > Don't really need it, by the time a PC hits my bench the drive is usually to > the point where even the geek squad could tell it's bad. Well, there is "bad" and "bad". Not all storege failures are due to a bad drive. It can also be interface errors, bad mounting, a marginal PSU. And the drive can have bad secotrs, seek problems, can have died from heat, etc. Arno > -- > -- > "Arno" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message > news:7rmiq8Fo52U3(a)mid.individual.net... >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage David B. <mail(a)nomail.net> wrote: >>> A smart report is useless, more often than not when I find a bad hard >>> drive. >>> smart believes there is no problem with the drive, it's unreliable at >>> best. >> >> Nobody said to look at the "smart status", which is pretty useless. >> Hovever the concrete values of the individual SMART attributes are >> not. Seems you are not using 99% of what SMART offers. >> >> Arno >> >> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >>> -- >>> "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:4b55ca94$1(a)news.bnb-lp.com... >>>> Gary wrote: >>>>> What does it usually mean when I run a disk scan for bad sectors on c >>>>> drive and the result is "Windows was unable to complete the disk scan" >>>>> >>>>> The symptom is a blue screen saying that there is most likely a bad >>>>> piece >>>>> of hardware. >>>> >>>> Download the free Everest utilities, from the following website: >>>> >>>> http://www.lavalys.com/ >>>> >>>> Run the Storage -> SMART report on the appropriate hard drive, and post >>>> the results to your reply. >>>> >>>> Yousuf Khan >> >> >> -- >> Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: >> arno(a)wagner.name >> GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 >> 338F >> ---- >> Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno(a)wagner.name GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F ---- Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans
From: David B. on 20 Jan 2010 09:09
you don't say -- -- "Arno" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message news:7rntsoF5s3U1(a)mid.individual.net... > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage David B. <mail(a)nomail.net> wrote: >> Don't really need it, by the time a PC hits my bench the drive is usually >> to >> the point where even the geek squad could tell it's bad. > > Well, there is "bad" and "bad". Not all storege failures > are due to a bad drive. It can also be interface errors, bad > mounting, a marginal PSU. And the drive can have bad secotrs, > seek problems, can have died from heat, etc. > > Arno > >> -- > > >> -- >> "Arno" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message >> news:7rmiq8Fo52U3(a)mid.individual.net... >>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage David B. <mail(a)nomail.net> wrote: >>>> A smart report is useless, more often than not when I find a bad hard >>>> drive. >>>> smart believes there is no problem with the drive, it's unreliable at >>>> best. >>> >>> Nobody said to look at the "smart status", which is pretty useless. >>> Hovever the concrete values of the individual SMART attributes are >>> not. Seems you are not using 99% of what SMART offers. >>> >>> Arno >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> -- >>> >>> >>>> -- >>>> "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>> news:4b55ca94$1(a)news.bnb-lp.com... >>>>> Gary wrote: >>>>>> What does it usually mean when I run a disk scan for bad sectors on c >>>>>> drive and the result is "Windows was unable to complete the disk >>>>>> scan" >>>>>> >>>>>> The symptom is a blue screen saying that there is most likely a bad >>>>>> piece >>>>>> of hardware. >>>>> >>>>> Download the free Everest utilities, from the following website: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.lavalys.com/ >>>>> >>>>> Run the Storage -> SMART report on the appropriate hard drive, and >>>>> post >>>>> the results to your reply. >>>>> >>>>> Yousuf Khan >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: >>> arno(a)wagner.name >>> GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 >>> 338F >>> ---- >>> Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans > > > -- > Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: > arno(a)wagner.name > GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 > 338F > ---- > Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans |