From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Pittman Subject: Re: raid5 failed while rebuiling - classical problem Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2010 22:36:10 +1000 Message-ID: <87aaq7e85h.fsf@rimspace.net> References: <20100702163155.511919c1@atak.bl.pg.gda.pl> <20100702231854.105b8612@atak.bl.pg.gda.pl> <20100703033659.0cffc6ad@natsu> <20100703174727.26a8965a@natsu> <20100703155140.01250825@atak.bl.pg.gda.pl> <20100704101834.42976337@atak.bl.pg.gda.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Janek Kozicki writes: > fsck finished, fixed a heft of bad inodes, and now everything seems t= o be > fine. So now I'm going to upgrade all that, use latest kernel, then s= witch > to raid6. > > I tested /dev/hda with badblocks read-write tests, and now it works f= ine, > which is kind of disappointing, because it caused to me so much troub= le. If that wrote to the failed block it might cause the bad space to be reallocated, which is by design what modern disks do. > Its warranty is going to expire in 3 months, but since it works fine = now I > don't think that I could get it replaced. I guess that it will "reall= y die" > after its warranty will expire... Depends entirely on your vendor; I have never had any refusal to replac= e a disk after the first bad block, reallocated on write on not. Those err= ors are tracked and can be reported by the drive, incidentally, so it has not j= ust vanished away. Daniel --=20 =E2=9C=A3 Daniel Pittman =E2=9C=89 daniel@rimspace.net = =E2=98=8E +61 401 155 707 =E2=99=BD made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html