| 1 |
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 9:27 PM Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Thoughts. Replace as soon as drive arrives or wait and see? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
So, first of all just about all my hard drives are in a RAID at this |
| 7 |
point, so I have a higher tolerance for issues. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
If a drive is under warranty I'll usually try to see if they will RMA |
| 10 |
it. More often than not they will, and in that case there is really |
| 11 |
no reason not to. I'll do advance shipping and replace the drive |
| 12 |
before sending the old one back so that I mostly have redundancy the |
| 13 |
whole time. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
If it isn't under warranty then I'll scrub it and see what happens. |
| 16 |
I'll of course do SMART self-tests, but usually an error like this |
| 17 |
won't actually clear until you overwrite the offline sector so that |
| 18 |
the drive can reallocate it. A RAID scrub/resilver/etc will overwrite |
| 19 |
the sector with the correct contents which will allow this to happen. |
| 20 |
(Otherwise there is no way for the drive to recover - if it knew what |
| 21 |
was stored there it wouldn't have an error in the first place.) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
If an error comes back then I'll replace the drive. My drives are |
| 24 |
pretty large at this point so I don't like keeping unreliable drives |
| 25 |
around. It just increases the risk of double failures, given that a |
| 26 |
large hard drive can take more than a day to replace. Write speeds |
| 27 |
just don't keep pace with capacities. I do have offline backups but I |
| 28 |
shudder at the thought of how long one of those would take to restore. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Rich |
Archives