Prev: low power linux server
Next: MSI NF980-G65 Motherboard
From: philo on 1 Nov 2009 14:41
Joe wrote:
> On 2009-11-01, philo <philo(a)privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> root wrote:
>>> Piotr Szymañski <szyman(a)REMOVETHISmagres.net> wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I have two Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 1 TB (ST31000528AS) drives in a
>>>> Linux software RAID-1 configuration. Today I've got a notification from
>>>> smartd that one of the drives (sda) is failing:
>>>>
>>> I had two of the 1Tb drives fail within a week of purchase.
>>> Send them back to Seagate for replacement. When you call
>>> Seagate they will warn you that they may reject your drive
>>> if you don't pack it correctly. I simply packed the first
>>> drive in the original box and returned it. They took it
>>> and returned the drive in a big box with lots of foam around
>>> the drive. I returned the second drive in the box they
>>> sent. Since then I have had no problems with the replacement
>>> drives. Something rotten about the first 1Tb drives.
>>>
>>> PS if you opt for them to send you a drive before they
>>> get your drive you will get hit with a $25 shipping charge.
>>> The UPS shipping for one drive is about $9.
>>
>>
>> It may be hard to warranty a drive that has not yet failed...
>> unless there's a known manufacturing defect...
>> but worth checking into
>
> Not at all. Warranty covers SMART failures on every drive I've dealt
> with...
>


Correct. a SMART error certainly qualifies for a warranty replacement
but the OP said that *one* of his two drives has an error...
not sure how one would be able to warranty a drive that exhibits no
errors...unless the mfg has a known manufacturing problem with a certain
batch of drives
From: Joe on 1 Nov 2009 15:19
On 2009-11-01, philo <philo(a)privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Joe wrote:
>> On 2009-11-01, philo <philo(a)privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>> root wrote:
>>>> Piotr Szymañski <szyman(a)REMOVETHISmagres.net> wrote:
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have two Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 1 TB (ST31000528AS) drives in a
>>>>> Linux software RAID-1 configuration. Today I've got a notification from
>>>>> smartd that one of the drives (sda) is failing:
>>>>>
>>>> I had two of the 1Tb drives fail within a week of purchase.
>>>> Send them back to Seagate for replacement. When you call
>>>> Seagate they will warn you that they may reject your drive
>>>> if you don't pack it correctly. I simply packed the first
>>>> drive in the original box and returned it. They took it
>>>> and returned the drive in a big box with lots of foam around
>>>> the drive. I returned the second drive in the box they
>>>> sent. Since then I have had no problems with the replacement
>>>> drives. Something rotten about the first 1Tb drives.
>>>>
>>>> PS if you opt for them to send you a drive before they
>>>> get your drive you will get hit with a $25 shipping charge.
>>>> The UPS shipping for one drive is about $9.
>>>
>>>
>>> It may be hard to warranty a drive that has not yet failed...
>>> unless there's a known manufacturing defect...
>>> but worth checking into
>>
>> Not at all. Warranty covers SMART failures on every drive I've dealt
>> with...
>>
>
>
> Correct. a SMART error certainly qualifies for a warranty replacement
> but the OP said that *one* of his two drives has an error...
> not sure how one would be able to warranty a drive that exhibits no
> errors...unless the mfg has a known manufacturing problem with a certain
> batch of drives

No, he said he is seeing SMART warnings about the second drive, as
well.


--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X
From: philo on 1 Nov 2009 15:43
Joe wrote:
> On 2009-11-01, philo <philo(a)privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> Joe wrote:
>>> On 2009-11-01, philo <philo(a)privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>> root wrote:
>>>>> Piotr Szymañski <szyman(a)REMOVETHISmagres.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have two Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 1 TB (ST31000528AS) drives in a
>>>>>> Linux software RAID-1 configuration. Today I've got a notification from
>>>>>> smartd that one of the drives (sda) is failing:
>>>>>>
>>>>> I had two of the 1Tb drives fail within a week of purchase.
>>>>> Send them back to Seagate for replacement. When you call
>>>>> Seagate they will warn you that they may reject your drive
>>>>> if you don't pack it correctly. I simply packed the first
>>>>> drive in the original box and returned it. They took it
>>>>> and returned the drive in a big box with lots of foam around
>>>>> the drive. I returned the second drive in the box they
>>>>> sent. Since then I have had no problems with the replacement
>>>>> drives. Something rotten about the first 1Tb drives.
>>>>>
>>>>> PS if you opt for them to send you a drive before they
>>>>> get your drive you will get hit with a $25 shipping charge.
>>>>> The UPS shipping for one drive is about $9.
>>>>
>>>> It may be hard to warranty a drive that has not yet failed...
>>>> unless there's a known manufacturing defect...
>>>> but worth checking into
>>> Not at all. Warranty covers SMART failures on every drive I've dealt
>>> with...
>>>
>>
>> Correct. a SMART error certainly qualifies for a warranty replacement
>> but the OP said that *one* of his two drives has an error...
>> not sure how one would be able to warranty a drive that exhibits no
>> errors...unless the mfg has a known manufacturing problem with a certain
>> batch of drives
>
> No, he said he is seeing SMART warnings about the second drive, as
> well.
>
>
then I missed that.

Time to get them both replaced for sure!
From: Pascal Hambourg on 1 Nov 2009 19:24
Hello,

Joe a �crit :
>
> No, he said he is seeing SMART warnings about the second drive, as
> well.

Do you mean this ?

> smartd[5845]: Device: /dev/sdb, SMART Prefailure Attribute: 1
> Raw_Read_Error_Rate changed from 108 to 117

This is just a SMART attribute change notification. As long as the
values remain above the threshold, there is no "SMART failure". Besides,
the higher the better, so 108 to 117 means the disk got better.
From: Joe on 2 Nov 2009 04:07
On 2009-11-02, Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam(a)plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Joe a écrit :
>>
>> No, he said he is seeing SMART warnings about the second drive, as
>> well.
>
> Do you mean this ?
>
>> smartd[5845]: Device: /dev/sdb, SMART Prefailure Attribute: 1
>> Raw_Read_Error_Rate changed from 108 to 117

No...

>
> This is just a SMART attribute change notification. As long as the
> values remain above the threshold, there is no "SMART failure". Besides,
> the higher the better, so 108 to 117 means the disk got better.

More along the lines of everything else he said:

My problem is that I'm seeing SMART warnings about the other drive
too:

Below is the listing of SMART attributes for the good drive (smartctl
-A /dev/sdb):

=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 10
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE
UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 113 099 006 Pre-fail Always - 52634145
3 Spin_Up_Time 0x0003 095 095 000 Pre-fail Always - 0
4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age Always - 56
5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 036 Pre-fail Always - 24
7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 075 060 030 Pre-fail Always - 35530576
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 096 096 000 Old_age Always - 3861
10 Spin_Retry_Count 0x0013 100 100 097 Pre-fail Always - 0
12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 020 Old_age Always - 56
183 Unknown_Attribute 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0
184 Unknown_Attribute 0x0032 100 100 099 Old_age Always - 0
187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
188 Unknown_Attribute 0x0032 100 099 000 Old_age Always - 1
189 High_Fly_Writes 0x003a 099 099 000 Old_age Always - 1
190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022 067 059 045 Old_age Always - 33 (Lifetime Min/Max 32/41)
194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 033 041 000 Old_age Always - 33 (0 19 0 0)
195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered 0x001a 036 015 000 Old_age Always - 52634145
197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x003e 200 200 000 Old_age Always - 0
240 Head_Flying_Hours 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 91955249811373
241 Unknown_Attribute 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 1261294398
242 Unknown_Attribute 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 1519044357

A number of these values are above their thresholds, and while the
drive is probably not pending imminent failure, I'd certainly get it
replaced once the really bad drive is taken care of.

--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: low power linux server
Next: MSI NF980-G65 Motherboard