| 1 |
Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 12:41:15 +0200, meino.cramer@×××.de wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>>> My understanding is that the test only aborts if the error is severe |
| 5 |
>>> enough to force it to do so. A simple bad block can be skipped and the |
| 6 |
>>> rest of the drive tested. |
| 7 |
>> But it is slightly off the point I tried to explain (I am no native |
| 8 |
>> english speaker...sorry...:) |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Suppose - as in my case - I have not yert managed to urge the hd to |
| 11 |
>> map the bad sector off... |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> Now...all tests abort after scanning 10% of the disk. Disk health |
| 14 |
>> status is reported as "PASSED"...cause only one bad sector has been |
| 15 |
>> found. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> But 90% of the space of the disk has never been scanned. |
| 18 |
> Read the smartctl message again, it's not reporting a bad sector, it's |
| 19 |
> reporting a read failure. Bad sectors are detected and mapped out in the |
| 20 |
> background, you have something more serious, something that prevents the |
| 21 |
> drive scanning past this point. If it's less then two years old, send it |
| 22 |
> back. Most drive manufacturers have a form on their web site where you |
| 23 |
> can input the serial number and see the warranty status. If you can |
| 24 |
> return it so so, ASAP. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Glad you noticed something I didn't. I just wish it was better news for |
| 29 |
the OP. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Question. Does that mean that the heads can't move past that point? If |
| 32 |
yes, does that mean the OP can't get any data that is further out than |
| 33 |
that point? I'm asking hoping I will learn something. I have taken |
| 34 |
drives apart so I know how the arm moves the heads across the platter. |
| 35 |
If I get what you are saying, it's like the heads get to a certain |
| 36 |
point, about 10%, and then stop. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Thanks. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Dale |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
:-) :-) |
Archives