From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E64EC433F5 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2022 19:46:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232738AbiAaTqu (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jan 2022 14:46:50 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54112 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231583AbiAaTqt (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jan 2022 14:46:49 -0500 Received: from mail-qk1-x735.google.com (mail-qk1-x735.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::735]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AC37C061714 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2022 11:46:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x735.google.com with SMTP id j24so10806758qkk.10 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2022 11:46:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vNICDSKfpWpOLE7IBgspBdycd3A2At2je2bMsQG9Wqg=; b=Hf5nqaMpAkAF+heAnXxN6OUbp9EkkwuWvmNDHPBi3QTfm8DpuMlfI7tj+xvyk+CBO4 k8f2as+tXdOzshND13rF/5UH6iduXeP88v/jHTbcNexNLaOzMEmQo2yUHY2TY6E91+uc 6Ngk6k0b8F91o2lkRCSo5vz1QVv+IU8bz6Nro4SrU1N2GFZpPLT+8Fo8Odfrlgpp2LRe K9hlTKXoQc+ikgyznzilIKFD8nFEItjssDhp3VxhM5YwDIMlgFOXqSSa3l3tsXc93Nf6 Ha/jMaVFhDAk2OAfwBTu2H43UKaJGJQ4Pp+Y+MK1B+9P1IPt/eDyrSWwZoVMC+0JGxat eYrw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vNICDSKfpWpOLE7IBgspBdycd3A2At2je2bMsQG9Wqg=; b=OZ8SYXIx1yJKhWnwaqN5+0yTevUcZ/pfE1tXoItMgcFtFE8ykD0Xz5nGnCgYkItxK/ xfoVxCkU9LM2qejUpCA1eW6+Uze3qhpbN2kG1pH2yzzYsw5S+eoLexIaBvFn5xG7LnJM mJP841kV/EdJBbTO3N/B7Peg+XgJKuEToenUQ0AGZe9ur+ZHuxrS2lNYrMkU0tp/h2dV QW7iZU4e8f3giVzLGQuM+oXukhmuk7X7Afmnm6TeEuS8zCMjbLchEHKt3hbKU7nrV5f0 I1G2EkgrP2Y/bUKpXuRpNpTQ3RO8kxIotA7Lfx8nlUZ9wtRKbnn3XE6zOI2TMyF/GMXm VxBw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532S9Nielrcu+Z/+VuN/Vdyv/POAiQ+JlmLIsPNcrRFNbB345iAh jx++rHLyGvu7r93VC8WC57RSc8iwbX1awPeSLlY1nvEi X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxane34gzB8Dr/i2bdzYUMdEbvZq/1mj+Bh3nuyKywxoTy35vdVPDQNHmuTqDxVe6lGkxMeyvprPe1U4bjw/+o= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4623:: with SMTP id br35mr8519631qkb.586.1643658408461; Mon, 31 Jan 2022 11:46:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220121164804.GE14596@justpickone.org> <6cfb92e5-5845-37ff-d237-4c3d663446e3@youngman.org.uk> <33fb3dfd-e234-14d9-7643-3449c700a241@youngman.org.uk> <7571b432-4b19-3de4-b04d-3a46b09b0629@turmel.org> <87leyvvrqp.fsf@esperi.org.uk> <698869e2-b45c-a355-f58b-d7b1b4f7830d@turmel.org> In-Reply-To: <698869e2-b45c-a355-f58b-d7b1b4f7830d@turmel.org> From: Roger Heflin Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 13:46:34 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: hardware recovery and RAID5 services To: Phil Turmel Cc: Geoff Back , Nix , Wols Lists , David T-G , Linux RAID Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org I have been warranty/replace them when the sectors refuse to reallocate, and/or the disks continue to hit the ERC/TLER timeout all of the time with bad sectors growing rapidly with no end in sight. If one is using raid6 and given the low rate of bad sectors, then it is pretty unlikely that there will be data loss. If one was using raid5 things would be more worrisome. On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 1:21 PM Phil Turmel wrote: > > On 1/31/22 14:07, Geoff Back wrote: > > > > > If a disk has one or more bad sectors, surely the only logical action is > > to schedule it for replacement as soon as a new one can be obtained; and > > if it's still in warranty, send it back. If the data is valuable enough > > to warrant use of RAID (along with, presumably, appropriate backups) > > surely it is too valuable to risk continuing to use a known faulty disk? > > > > In which case, I would suggest that dangerous experiments that try to > > force the disk to reallocate the block are arguably pointless. > > > > Just my opinion, but one that has served me well so far. > > > > Regards, > > > > Geoff. > > I would be surprised if you got warranty replacement just for a few > re-allocated sectors. The sheer quantity of sectors in modern drives > and the tiny magnetic domains involved means **no** drive is error-free. > Just most defects are identified and mapped out before shipping. > Reallocations cover the marginal cases. > > I replace drives when re-allocations hit double digits, though I've had > to run a few corners cases well past that point. > > Phil