From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robin Bowes Subject: Re: RAID5 - 2nd drive died whilst waiting for RMA Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:30:59 +0000 Message-ID: <41992013.3030008@robinbowes.com> References: <200411152124.iAFLOWN22186@www.watkins-home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200411152124.iAFLOWN22186@www.watkins-home.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Guy Cc: 'David Greaves' , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Guy wrote: > Something to consider. A bad block does not indicate a failed drive. > However, this point is debatable. There is a reason they have spare blocks. > Most or all drives can re-locate a bad block to a spare. When I say "failed" I mean "diagnosed as faulty by the Maxtor PowerMax utility". Some drives that were diagnosed as faulty would appear to be working OK but would cause the server to crash when syncronising the array for the first time. I suspect the guy I got these drives from had no idea how to handle computer gear - the drives arrived packed tightly in a rigid box with a thin layer of bubble wrap. I suggested to him that this was sub-optimal and he claimed that bacuse the box was really hard it would project the drives more. Obviously not heard of g force then! R. -- http://robinbowes.com