Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:55:05 -0800
From:      Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
To:        Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>
Cc:        FreeBSD - <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Bad Blocks... Should I RMA?
Message-ID:  <EA8AFE7A-BE51-42EE-8C94-E5F09D7698FC@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <20091118014634.S65262@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
References:  <20091116231341.40E3F10656B0@hub.freebsd.org> <20091118014634.S65262@sola.nimnet.asn.au>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Hi--

On Nov 17, 2009, at 7:51 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
[ ... ]
> For instance, I've got two Fujitsu 5400rpm 2.5" drives in two laptops,
> one MHV2040AH with near 19,000 hours on it, and a much newer  
> MHV2120AH,
> 40 and 120GB respectively.  Nice quiet low-power laptop drives, fwiw.
>
> Both show as (more recently) being in the smartctl database, and both
> show _exactly_ the same values for this one:
>
>  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   024    Pre-fail   
> Always  -  8589934592000
>
> Now if that were a number of 512-byte sectors, it'd be 4096000 GB! :)
> but both drives are 100% ok, as the VALUE / WORST figures show.

I wouldn't conclude that the drives were 100% OK from that line,  
although they *might* be; I'd conclude that the drives aren't  
implementing this SMART field correctly in their firmware.  Are you  
using the latest version of smartctl-- updates to that can sometimes  
better interpret vendor-specific odditities.

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EA8AFE7A-BE51-42EE-8C94-E5F09D7698FC>