Re: Question about raid robustness when disk fails

[Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>]

Tim Bock <jtbock@daylight.com> writes:

> Thank you for the response.  Through the smartctl tests, I noticed that
> the "seek error rate" value for the misbehaving disk was at 42, with the
> threshold at 30.  For other disks in the same array, the "seek error
> rate" values were up around 75 (same threshold of 30).  As it seems the
> values decrement to the threshold, I took that as a further sign that
> the disk was in trouble and replaced it.  Any likely correlation between
> the described problem and the "seek error rate" value?

Always keep in mind that smart values are often random, fictional or
garbage. I have disks that have an airflow temperature (outside) of 80+
and temperature (inside) of 50+. Both going down as the disk heats up
from use.

The only values I would keep a close eye on is remapped sectors and
pending sectors. Anything else gives nice graphs but I always feel is
totaly useless. And even the pending sectors are != 0 on one drive while
badblocks reports no errors on repeated passes. The drive just doesn't
seem to reduce the count when it successfully remaps a sector.

MfG
        Goswin