From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: Some very basic questions
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:15:45 -0400
Message-ID: <1224681345.6448.4.camel@think.oraclecorp.com>
References: <20081021132322.271ad728.skraw@ithnet.com>
	 <48FDD710.5050702@hp.com> <20081021190136.89b2c6af.skraw@ithnet.com>
	 <20081021171513.GA8799@infradead.org> <48FE11F9.7040700@gmail.com>
	 <20081022142759.ac33a16c.skraw@ithnet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@gmail.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	jim owens <jowens@hp.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
To: Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>
Return-path: <linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20081022142759.ac33a16c.skraw@ithnet.com>
List-ID: <linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 14:27 +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:31:37 -0400
> Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > [...]
> > If you have remapped a big chunk of the sectors (say more than 10%), you 
> > should grab the data off the disk asap and replace it. Worry less about 
> > errors during read, writes indicate more serious errors.
> 
> Ok, now for the bad news: money is invented.
> If you replace a disk before real failure you won't get replacement from the
> manufacturer. That may sound irrelevant to someone handling 5 disks, but is
> significant if handling 500 or more. The replacement rate is indeed much
> higher than people think from their home pcs.

Hardware vendors already do replace disks based on policies defined by
their own array hardware.  These are already predictive.

-chris