![]() However one could argue that if there are for example 20 reallocations and this number remains stable over time, it's relatively safe to continue using a drive. I personally consider replacing a drive with more than 2 reallocations. I an not recommending or endorsing continued use of drives with (many) reallocated sectors. Your question is close to being off-topic in that regard. Whether a drive is still usable is largely a matter of personal preference. ![]() IF the drive can not reallocate bad sectors, it's really bad and the drive should be binned. You should let take the drive take care of this. If not the above, can I just create partitions before and after the ![]() If not, since I'm using LVM on top of RAID, is there a way to tellĮither of these to just skip the bad area?Īgain if sectors were put back to use or reallocated then there's no areas to avoid. To allow the drive to detect potential sectors at risk it's wise to run a surface test from time to time (Victoria for Windows can be used for this). However if pending nor reallocated increases over time, the drive is probably okay. Reallocated: I do not trust drives with many reallocated sectors.I'd examine SMART data and look at RAW values for reallocated and pending sectors: Whether it's wise without looking at the SMART data is verse two. If zero fill succeeded then whatever bad/pending sectors were present have been put back to use (nothing fundamentally wrong with them) or were reallocated. If the zero fill succeeded, and the short test passed, can I still use Again I had no obvious issues with it (some files even had checksums, so I was sure they were intact).Īn old question but still relevant today. Since I didn't have important data on it and I also couldn't run badblocks -w on it, I kept just using it for about a year until I got a replacement. I also had another Seagate Barracuda 5900 RPM 1 TB drive with a couple of bad sectors reported by SMART, but no obvious issues. I kept using the disk for unimportant data and I had no obvious issues with it (some files even had checksums, so I can be sure they were intact). Because the bad sectors were probably relocated when the write was done, it didn't report any bad blocks. I run badblocks -w on it which means it scans for bad blocks by writing some patterns on every block of the device, reading every block and comparing the contents. I had a Seagate Barracuda 7200 RPM 1 TB drive with a couple of bad sectors (Linux reported I/O errors). ![]() As a result, the -c option to mke2fs is a much simpler and less error-prone method of checking a disk for bad blocks before formatting it, as mke2fs will automatically pass the correct parameters to the badblocks program. Note that the block numbers in the bad block list must be generated using the same block size as used by mke2fs. If this option is specified twice, then a slower read write test is used instead of a fast read-only test. For example mkfs.ext4 has these parameters:Ĭheck the device for bad blocks before creating the file system. You can also pass a list of bad blocks when you format the disk (partition). Yes, if you're willing to take the risk of losing your data. If not the above, can I just create partitions before and after the part of the drive with the bad LBAs? After moving them, you could allocate a logical volume (LV) on the affected PEs to make sure they don't get used again. If you're willing to take the risk of losing your data, you can try moving the affected physical extents (PEs) with pvmove, but figuring out which PEs correspond to the bad sectors is going to take some grunt work. If not, since I'm using LVM on top of RAID, is there a way to tell either of these to just skip the bad area? Also some of them manage to relocate (remap) the bad sectors when you write to them again, but in your case it seems it didn't work. By the way, most drives happily write the data without checking that it was really written correctly, which can lead to silent data corruption. Seatools said it has some bad sectors, so obviously you can't use the whole drive. If the zero fill succeeded, and the short test passed, can I still use the whole drive?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |