Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] SMART drive test results, 2.0 for same drive as before.
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 17:30:00
Message-Id: 54C3D691.7070404@gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-user] SMART drive test results, 2.0 for same drive as before. by Dale
1 Dale wrote:
2 > Howdy,
3 >
4 > This is concerning a hard drive I had issues with a while back. I been
5 > using it to do backups with as a test if nothing else. Anyway, it seems
6 > to have issues once again.
7 >
8 > <<SNIP>>
9 > Since this is the 2nd time for this specific drive, thoughts?
10 >
11 > By the way, I'm doing a dd to erase the drive just for giggles. Since
12 > it ain't blowing smoke, I may use it as a backup still, just to play
13 > with, until I can get another drive. I think that moved up the priority
14 > list a bit now.
15 >
16 > Thoughts?
17 >
18 > Dale
19 >
20 > :-) :-)
21 >
22 >
23
24 Well, I have dd'd the thing a few times and ran the tests again, it
25 still gives errors. What's odd, they seem to move around. Is there a
26 bug crawling around in my drive?? lol
27
28 # 1 Extended offline Completed: read failure 40%
29 21500 4032048552
30
31 #12 Extended offline Completed: read failure 40%
32 21406 4032272464
33
34 Anyway, I'm going to start saving up for a new drive. I may see if I
35 can jump around that bad spot or something since right now, any backup
36 is better than nothing at all. Well, sort of anyway. I'm just
37 wondering if I should update to a 4TB drive instead of a 3TB one since
38 I'm over half full already. :?
39
40 /dev/mapper/Home2-Home2 2.7T 1.7T 1.1T 63% /home
41
42 Thanks to Daniel and Bob for their replies. I think this drive needs a
43 funeral. Once is bad enough but twice, not good.
44
45 Dale
46
47 :-) :-)

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] SMART drive test results, 2.0 for same drive as before. Nils Holland <nholland@×××××.org>