Too S.M.A.R.T.
in [Dell]
|
From: Ben Myers on 15 May 2010 10:47 Tested a pair of Hitachi 80GB 2.5" PATA drives recently, so I might possibly use them in a refurb laptop. First, I ran HDAT2, which told me that although the drives had zero reallocated sectors, there were a number of sectors (8 and 2, respectively) PENDING reallocation. This says that the sectors were corrupt, but that SMART was turned off in the computer where they last ran. Next, I ran Hitachi's Drive Fitness Test (DFT). Sure enough, it said that the drive had corrupted sectors in need of repair. So I did the repair function of DFT, and it was successful. Last, I ran HDAT2 again, and it told me that there were ZERO (!!!!) reallocated sectors and none pending reallocation. But another SMART value told me that there were some reallocation events. So the questions are: Does DFT intentionally mislead by keeping the reallocated sector count zero? Does DFT actually reformat the corrupt sectors and reuse them, rather than replacing them with spares? DFT is too S.M.A.R.T. for its own good. Now I am uncertain whether I should use the drives in laptops, or whether there is too much risk in doing so. Altho of general interest, this is on topic for Dell, which uses Hitachi drives when it can get them at a better price than other manufacturers sell drives for... Ben Myers
From: William R. Walsh on 15 May 2010 12:06 Hi! > This says that the sectors were corrupt, but that SMART was > turned off in the computer where they last ran. If the drive's SMART data shows that there are pending sectors, then SMART was most likely turned on. What it's waiting for is either a read/write surface scan (to be initiated by some other software) or enough idle time to run the full offline SMART tests and examine those pending sectors to see if they should be replaced (if they're really bad) or put back into use. As these are laptop drives, I doubt that they ever got the chance to run through a complete offline test routine. > Last, I ran HDAT2 again, and it told me that there were ZERO > (!!!!) reallocated sectors and none pending reallocation. That is odd. It would seem like the pending sectors were found to be OK in that case, and yet there were some reallocations. All I can think is that the drive's electronics and firmware might be telling a story here. Perhaps the SMART data is not particularly honest? I think you should use the drives. They're quite likely to be plenty good enough. Got a copy of Spinrite? (I'd trust it more than the DFT utility...) William
From: Christopher Muto on 15 May 2010 13:56 Ben Myers wrote: > Tested a pair of Hitachi 80GB 2.5" PATA drives recently, so I might > possibly use them in a refurb laptop. First, I ran HDAT2, which told me > that although the drives had zero reallocated sectors, there were a > number of sectors (8 and 2, respectively) PENDING reallocation. This > says that the sectors were corrupt, but that SMART was turned off in the > computer where they last ran. > > Next, I ran Hitachi's Drive Fitness Test (DFT). Sure enough, it said > that the drive had corrupted sectors in need of repair. So I did the > repair function of DFT, and it was successful. > > Last, I ran HDAT2 again, and it told me that there were ZERO (!!!!) > reallocated sectors and none pending reallocation. But another SMART > value told me that there were some reallocation events. > > So the questions are: > Does DFT intentionally mislead by keeping the reallocated sector count > zero? > Does DFT actually reformat the corrupt sectors and reuse them, rather > than replacing them with spares? > > DFT is too S.M.A.R.T. for its own good. > > Now I am uncertain whether I should use the drives in laptops, or > whether there is too much risk in doing so. > > Altho of general interest, this is on topic for Dell, which uses Hitachi > drives when it can get them at a better price than other manufacturers > sell drives for... Ben Myers smart is known for giving false positives, overreacting to err on the side of caution. dft is more through and more acurate. if dft says it is ok then i would believe it and use the drive. http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/technolo/dft/dft.htm
From: Ben Myers on 15 May 2010 15:04 On 5/15/2010 1:56 PM, Christopher Muto wrote: > Ben Myers wrote: >> Tested a pair of Hitachi 80GB 2.5" PATA drives recently, so I might >> possibly use them in a refurb laptop. First, I ran HDAT2, which told >> me that although the drives had zero reallocated sectors, there were a >> number of sectors (8 and 2, respectively) PENDING reallocation. This >> says that the sectors were corrupt, but that SMART was turned off in >> the computer where they last ran. >> >> Next, I ran Hitachi's Drive Fitness Test (DFT). Sure enough, it said >> that the drive had corrupted sectors in need of repair. So I did the >> repair function of DFT, and it was successful. >> >> Last, I ran HDAT2 again, and it told me that there were ZERO (!!!!) >> reallocated sectors and none pending reallocation. But another SMART >> value told me that there were some reallocation events. >> >> So the questions are: >> Does DFT intentionally mislead by keeping the reallocated sector count >> zero? >> Does DFT actually reformat the corrupt sectors and reuse them, rather >> than replacing them with spares? >> >> DFT is too S.M.A.R.T. for its own good. >> >> Now I am uncertain whether I should use the drives in laptops, or >> whether there is too much risk in doing so. >> >> Altho of general interest, this is on topic for Dell, which uses >> Hitachi drives when it can get them at a better price than other >> manufacturers sell drives for... Ben Myers > > smart is known for giving false positives, overreacting to err on the > side of caution. dft is more through and more acurate. if dft says it is > ok then i would believe it and use the drive. > http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/technolo/dft/dft.htm Thanks for the thoughts. I get paranoid about hard drives, because it seems like the only computers that come back to me under warranty end up with hard drive problems. After all, all the warranty in the world will not recover someone's valuable data... Ben
From: RnR on 16 May 2010 00:26 On Sat, 15 May 2010 15:04:28 -0400, Ben Myers <ben_myers(a)charter.net> wrote: >On 5/15/2010 1:56 PM, Christopher Muto wrote: >> Ben Myers wrote: >>> Tested a pair of Hitachi 80GB 2.5" PATA drives recently, so I might >>> possibly use them in a refurb laptop. First, I ran HDAT2, which told >>> me that although the drives had zero reallocated sectors, there were a >>> number of sectors (8 and 2, respectively) PENDING reallocation. This >>> says that the sectors were corrupt, but that SMART was turned off in >>> the computer where they last ran. >>> >>> Next, I ran Hitachi's Drive Fitness Test (DFT). Sure enough, it said >>> that the drive had corrupted sectors in need of repair. So I did the >>> repair function of DFT, and it was successful. >>> >>> Last, I ran HDAT2 again, and it told me that there were ZERO (!!!!) >>> reallocated sectors and none pending reallocation. But another SMART >>> value told me that there were some reallocation events. >>> >>> So the questions are: >>> Does DFT intentionally mislead by keeping the reallocated sector count >>> zero? >>> Does DFT actually reformat the corrupt sectors and reuse them, rather >>> than replacing them with spares? >>> >>> DFT is too S.M.A.R.T. for its own good. >>> >>> Now I am uncertain whether I should use the drives in laptops, or >>> whether there is too much risk in doing so. >>> >>> Altho of general interest, this is on topic for Dell, which uses >>> Hitachi drives when it can get them at a better price than other >>> manufacturers sell drives for... Ben Myers >> >> smart is known for giving false positives, overreacting to err on the >> side of caution. dft is more through and more acurate. if dft says it is >> ok then i would believe it and use the drive. >> http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/technolo/dft/dft.htm > >Thanks for the thoughts. I get paranoid about hard drives, because it >seems like the only computers that come back to me under warranty end up >with hard drive problems. After all, all the warranty in the world will >not recover someone's valuable data... Ben As I've said before, I've had unreliable SMART findings so I don't put 100% faith in them. I can't explain nor remember what drives these bad findings were in as it's been years but I think it was William that said to try SPINRITE and I agree. Of course you know this already.
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 Prev: Please recommend a color printer/scanner combo Next: Adding second hard drive questions |