Re: raid/device failure

[EJ Vincent <ej@ejane.org>]

On 2/10/2013 10:44 PM, Phil Turmel wrote:
> On 02/10/2013 09:52 PM, EJ Vincent wrote:
>> On 2/10/2013 9:09 PM, Phil Turmel wrote:
>>> Have these drives ever been scrubbed? (I vaguely recall you mentioning
>>> new drives...) If they are new and already had a URE, I'd be concerned
>>> about mishandling during shipping. If they aren't new, I'd
>>> destructively exercise them and retest.
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>> Could you elaborate on procedures and tools to thoroughly exercise newly
>> purchased drives? Are you talking about programs such as 'badblocks'?
> Yes, badblocks is convenient because it is part of e2fsprogs, which
> pretty much ships by default in all distros.
>
> What I recommend:
>
> Record the complete drive status as unpacked:
> 1) smartctl -x /dev/sdX >xxxx-as-received.smart.txt
>
> Userspace surface check:
> 2) badblocks -w -b 4096 /dev/sdX
>
> Security erase (vital for SSDs):
> 3a) hdparm --user-master u --security-set-pass password /dev/sdX
> 3b) hdparm --user-master u --security-erase password /dev/sdX
>
> (wait until done)
>
> Long drive self-test:
> 4) smartctl -t long /dev/sdX
>
> (wait until done)
>
> Record the complete drive status post-test:
> 5) smartctl -x /dev/sdX >xxxx-as-tested.smart.txt
>
> I won't accept any reallocations in a new drive, and no more than single
> digits in older drives.  In my (subjective) experience, once
> reallocations get into double digits, their incidence seems to accelerate.
>
> I also pay extra attention to desktop drives with 30,000+ hours, as I
> haven't had any get to 40,000.
>
> Phil

Very clear.  Thanks!

-EJ