SMART diags (was: mismatch_cnt != 0, member content mismatch, but md says the mirror is good)

[Tom Buskey]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Benjamin Scott <dragonhawk at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Ken D'Ambrosio <ken at jots.org> wrote:
> > Huh -- I actually *have* had SMART tell me things were awry, several
> > times.
>
>   Well, that's good to know.  :)
>
>  Just curious, did you get a chance to see if any of them actually
> started failing soon after?
>
>  Like I said, I did have one case where SMART said something was
> wrong, but nobody could figure out why it was saying that, and they
> only did an exchange because I insisted.  And, of course, since it was
> a service contract, I couldn't keep the old part to see if/when it
> would actually start showing other symptoms.
>
>
Google released a study of hard drive failures (last year?).  Another
organization (CERN?) release one at about the same time.

It said SMART is 50/50 and not all that reliable as a defect predictor.
They found little difference between enterprise and consumer grade
lifetimes.  Once drives have errors, they multiply quickly.

It is definitely worth digging up.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20100224/29286b2b/attachment.html