Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:57:20 -0500 From: Tom Worster <fsb@thefsb.org> To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Cc: FreeBSD Questions ML <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Clearing SMART errors I don't care about? Message-ID: <C57174E0.6D1C%fsb@thefsb.org> In-Reply-To: <20081219205105.F2813@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/19/08 2:51 PM, "Wojciech Puchar" <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote: > which means that in 2 cases of 3 you ARE warned. yes. but what do i do with a smart warning? the google paper indicates that even they haven't figured it out yet, although they express some hope. "Despite those strong correlations, we =DEnd that failure prediction models based on SMART parameters alone are likely to be severely limited in their prediction accuracy, given that a large fraction of our failed drives have shown no SMART error signals whatsoever. This result suggests that SMART models are more useful in predicting trends for large aggregate populations than for individual components." in managing my servers, it's the failure of individual components that count. considering also 1) false positives and 2) replacement comes with a finite chance of causing service outage, it's not clear to me that replacing a dis= k on the basis of a smart warning is prudent. i'm not proposing any firm conclusions should be drawn. i started this by saying "i'm not convinced that smart monitoring is of much value..."=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C57174E0.6D1C%fsb>