Re: [Hampshire] [OT] MTBF

Top Page

Reply to this message
Author: Stephen Rowles
Date:  
To: Hampshire LUG Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Hampshire] [OT] MTBF
James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
> None of the above smart parameters give any indication from the accelerometers.
> So, one has no way of telling if shock was a contributing factor to
> the HD failure.
> It would be nice to see smart stats saying, we got this much shock
> before we managed to park the heads.
>
> Another thing, for the pre-fail smarts like:
> Raw_Read_Error_Rate 16203744
> Seek_Error_Rate 139114079
> Hardware_ECC_Recovered 164354431
>
> What is an acceptable value and what indicates things starting to go wrong?
> My laptop HD has these values at zero!!!
> On my desktop, they keep increasing over time. So, what is an
> acceptable "rate" ?
>
> James

Unfortunately this is my work desktop machine, I don't think it has an
accelerometer in it... my personal laptop at home would appear to have
this line:

191 G-Sense_Error_Rate      0x000a   100   100   000    Old_age   
Always       -       0    


Which according to google is something to do with shock-sensitive sensor
on the drive.

Unfortunately I'm not an expert in analysing the output to tell you what
the numbers mean, I expect there is some software that will do a better
analysis job but I don't know of any off-hand. I've only used it once
before in anger on a drive that was making odd noises and behaving
strangely, one of the numbers was huge, which I looked up and google
suggested it indicated a failing drive, so I backed up the data and
replaced it :)