From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Domsch Subject: Re: Defect list size ? Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:56:25 -0600 Message-ID: <20050316195625.GA12283@lists.us.dell.com> References: <20050316194709.GA4444@bougret.hpl.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Received: from ausc60pc101.us.dell.com ([143.166.85.206]:186 "EHLO ausc60pc101.us.dell.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262771AbVCPT40 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:56:26 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050316194709.GA4444@bougret.hpl.hp.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Jean Tourrilhes Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 11:47:09AM -0800, Jean Tourrilhes wrote: > Hi, > > What is a reasonable defect list size for an almost new disk > (3 weeks - 146 GB). > scscinfo -d gives me : > -------------------------------------------- > Data from Defect Lists > ---------------------- > 3060 entries in manufacturer table. > ... > [truncated] > -------------------------------------------- > Which is way more than my older and smaller disk. I'm > wondering if this is acceptable or if I have a bad disk. 306184192 sectors (give or take a few) on that disk. 3060 sectors bad at low-level format time. While it may feel like a large number, it really isn't for the size disk you've got. Now, if the number of "Grown" defects starts increasing, then yes, be worried. Thanks, Matt -- Matt Domsch Software Architect Dell Linux Solutions linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com