read errors

[DonLogan]

I have a 200 gig ide hard drive that's giving me read errors.
I write lots of files, daily, to the drive then use other applications
to read the files. The read applications are hiccuping with their
various errors.
I run xp pro so I ran Properties-Tools-Error-Checking. Took about 24
hours and seemed to be correcting but never gave me an analysis or
report. Now new files are also erroring.
I'd like to run a repair utility, free?, to correct problems.
Ideally i'd like to keep the existing files but not absolutely
necessary.
Would appreciate recommendations.
thanks

 

[Squeeze]

DonLogan wrote in news:[email protected]

I have a 200 gig ide hard drive that's giving me read errors.
I write lots of files, daily, to the drive then use other applications
to read the files. The read applications are hiccuping with their
various errors.
I run xp pro so I ran Properties-Tools-Error-Checking. Took about 24
hours and seemed to be correcting but never gave me an analysis or
report. Now new files are also erroring.
I'd like to run a repair utility, free?, to correct problems.
Ideally i'd like to keep the existing files but not absolutely
necessary.
Would appreciate recommendations.
thanks

FindBad

 

[Arno Wagner]

I have a 200 gig ide hard drive that's giving me read errors.
I write lots of files, daily, to the drive then use other applications
to read the files. The read applications are hiccuping with their
various errors.
I run xp pro so I ran Properties-Tools-Error-Checking. Took about 24
hours and seemed to be correcting but never gave me an analysis or
report. Now new files are also erroring.
I'd like to run a repair utility, free?, to correct problems.
Ideally i'd like to keep the existing files but not absolutely
necessary.
Would appreciate recommendations.
thanks

First, it is very unliekely that you can repair the drive, if indeed
it is the source of the problems. Modern drives that give lots of read
errors are dying in allmost all cases.

Second, get a SMART utility and post the SMART status here.
Nothing else allows disgnostics with reasonable effort.

Arno

 

[Rod Speed]

I have a 200 gig ide hard drive that's giving me read errors.

Likely the drive is dying. Post the Everest SMART report.
http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=4181
Dont just use the OKs, post the actual report here.

I write lots of files, daily, to the drive then use other applications to read
the files. The read applications are hiccuping with their various errors.

I run xp pro so I ran Properties-Tools-Error-Checking. Took
about 24 hours and seemed to be correcting but never gave
me an analysis or report. Now new files are also erroring.

I'd like to run a repair utility, free?, to correct problems.

That wont help if the drive is dying.

Ideally i'd like to keep the existing files but not absolutely necessary.
Would appreciate recommendations.

Have the drive replaced under warranty if the SMART report shows its dying.

 

[DonLogan]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------[ EVEREST Home Edition (c) 2003-2005 Lavalys, Inc.
]------------------------------------------------------------

Version EVEREST
v2.20.405
Homepage
http://www.lavalys.com/
Report Type Quick Report
Computer P4STATION
(Digital Lathe)
Generator malcolm
Operating System Microsoft
Windows XP Professional 5.1.2600 (WinXP Retail)
Date 2008-05-29
Time 22:55


--------[ SMART
]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ SAMSUNG SP0802N (S00JJ60Y558373) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
03 Spin Up Time 25 100 100 6208
OK: Value is normal
04 Start/Stop Count 0 100 100 394
OK: Always passing
05 Reallocated Sector Count 11 97 97 7
OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
08 Seek Time Performance 15 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
09 Power-On Time Count 0 100 100 453320
OK: Always passing
0A Spin Retry Count 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
0B Calibration Retry Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
0C Power Cycle Count 0 100 100 212
OK: Always passing
C2 Temperature 0 121 97 39
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 100 100 1326755
OK: Always passing
C4 Reallocation Event Count 0 97 97 7
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate 0 200 200 0
OK: Always passing
C8 Write Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
C9 <vendor-specific> 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848
OK: Value is normal
03 Spin Up Time 0 97 96 0
OK: Always passing
04 Start/Stop Count 20 100 100 588
OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84
OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378
OK: Value is normal
09 Power-On Time Count 0 89 89 9812
OK: Always passing
0A Spin Retry Count 97 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
0C Power Cycle Count 20 100 100 424
OK: Value is normal
C2 Temperature 0 41 53 41
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing
C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate 0 200 200 0
OK: Always passing
C8 Write Error Rate 0 100 253 0
OK: Always passing
CA <vendor-specific> 0 100 253 0
OK: Always passing


--------[ Debug - PCI
]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B00 D00 F00: Intel 82845 Memory Controller Hub [A-3]

Offset 00: 86 80 30 1A 06 00 90 20 03 00 00 06 00 00 00 00
Offset 10: 08 00 00 F8 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset 20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 43 10 70 80
Offset 30: 00 00 00 00 E4 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset 40: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset 50: 00 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 15 00 00
Offset 60: 04 08 0C 10 12 14 14 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset 70: 33 33 22 00 00 00 00 00 10 02 00 03 70 01 00 20
Offset 80: 6A 00 82 00 00 00 00 00 00 80 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset 90: 10 11 01 00 00 11 11 00 41 19 00 00 00 0A 38 00
Offset A0: 02 00 20 00 17 02 00 1F 04 03 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset B0: 80 00 00 00 30 00 00 00 00 60 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset C0: 44 40 50 11 00 28 05 08 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset D0: 02 28 00 0E 0B 00 00 33 AF 01 31 B5 00 00 08 00
Offset E0: 00 00 00 00 09 A0 04 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offset F0: 00 00 01 00 74 FC 20 98 38 0F 00 00 04 00 00 00

sorry if formating an issue

--------------------------

I've got a probable reproduceable app error on a specific file. This
should identify file name and can maybe map soft/bad spot(s)?

So, good looking smart & who knows what? I don't think it's any
inboard strange interface issue. Gotta surface spot on the platter
going bad, i think. Works good on 1,000s of i/os otherwise.

Too bad Check-Disk didn't spit out info.

Just replace/warranty drive, but always like to use cadavers for
forensics. But smart looks ok?

thanks

 

[Rod Speed]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems recognizable by me.

There are real problems tho, particularly with the second drive.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------[ EVEREST Home Edition (c) 2003-2005 Lavalys, Inc.
]------------------------------------------------------------

Version EVEREST
v2.20.405
Homepage
http://www.lavalys.com/
Report Type Quick Report
Computer P4STATION
(Digital Lathe)
Generator malcolm
Operating System Microsoft
Windows XP Professional 5.1.2600 (WinXP Retail)
Date 2008-05-29
Time 22:55


--------[ SMART
]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ SAMSUNG SP0802N (S00JJ60Y558373) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
03 Spin Up Time 25 100 100 6208
OK: Value is normal
04 Start/Stop Count 0 100 100 394
OK: Always passing
05 Reallocated Sector Count 11 97 97 7
OK: Value is normal

That number is getting up a bit, and since the other drive is much worse
in that area, the actual problem might be the power supply, but likely isnt.

07 Seek Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
08 Seek Time Performance 15 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
09 Power-On Time Count 0 100 100 453320
OK: Always passing
0A Spin Retry Count 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
0B Calibration Retry Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
0C Power Cycle Count 0 100 100 212
OK: Always passing
C2 Temperature 0 121 97 39
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 100 100 1326755
OK: Always passing
C4 Reallocation Event Count 0 97 97 7
OK: Always passing

Thats just reporting the previous one again effectively.

C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate 0 200 200 0
OK: Always passing
C8 Write Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
C9 <vendor-specific> 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848
OK: Value is normal
03 Spin Up Time 0 97 96 0
OK: Always passing
04 Start/Stop Count 20 100 100 588
OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84
OK: Value is normal

Thats the reason you are getting so many bad files.

07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378
OK: Value is normal
09 Power-On Time Count 0 89 89 9812
OK: Always passing
0A Spin Retry Count 97 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
0C Power Cycle Count 20 100 100 424
OK: Value is normal
C2 Temperature 0 41 53 41
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing

Urk, that drive is clearly dying, thats an obscenely high number.

C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing
Ditto.

C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate 0 200 200 0
OK: Always passing
C8 Write Error Rate 0 100 253 0
OK: Always passing
CA <vendor-specific> 0 100 253 0
OK: Always passing

sorry if formating an issue

Yeah, thats one real downside with Everest, along with the very
misleading OKs on those obscenely bad results with the bad sectors.

--------------------------

I've got a probable reproduceable app error on a specific file. This
should identify file name and can maybe map soft/bad spot(s)?

No point in doing that with so many uncorrectable bad sectors.

Just have the drive replaced under warranty.

So, good looking smart

Nope, one of the worst thats been posted here, actually.

& who knows what? I don't think it's any inboard strange interface issue.
Correct.

Gotta surface spot on the platter going bad, i think.

Nope, that doesnt happen. There's some other very fundamental
problem with the drive, likely a poor connection somewhere or a
cracked flexible connection to the heads etc.

Works good on 1,000s of i/os otherwise.

Nope, its dying.

Too bad Check-Disk didn't spit out info.

Just replace/warranty drive, but always like to use cadavers for forensics.

What ?

But smart looks ok?

Nope, one of the worst ever posted here.

 

[Arno Wagner]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848
OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84
OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667
--------------------------

Attribute 01 is very low. In addition you already have 84 reallocated
sectors and 667 sectors the dive cannot read that will likely
be reallocated on the bnext write. Also a lot of sectors are marginal
(attribute C3) and can only be read using ECC. This may be an
external problem as the seek error rate (07) ia also pretty baed.
A bad PSU or strong vibration can do this occasionally. It may also
be a sign of the read-amplifier dying, as it is needed for positioning.
Damaged drive heads are also possible.

Anyways: Make a backup NOW. This drive is very likely dying. You will
loose more data and it can die catastrophically at any moment.

I've got a probable reproduceable app error on a specific file. This
should identify file name and can maybe map soft/bad spot(s)?

Modern drives do not have soft/bad spots anymore. This type
of indicates bad heads or electronics, i.e. impeding complete
drive failure.

So, good looking smart & who knows what? I don't think it's any
inboard strange interface issue. Gotta surface spot on the platter
going bad, i think. Works good on 1,000s of i/os otherwise.

It is not an interface issue, the ATA error counts are normal
and very low or zero.

Too bad Check-Disk didn't spit out info.

Checkdisk works on filesystem level. It cannot deal with this.

Just replace/warranty drive, but always like to use cadavers for
forensics. But smart looks ok?

No, it looks pretty bad. Dont take any stock in the thresholds.
HDD manufacturers set these often far too high.

Arno

 

[Squeeze]

Arno Wagner wrote in news:[email protected]

First, it is very unliekely that you can repair the drive, if indeed
it is the source of the problems.

Modern drives that give lots of read
errors are dying in allmost all cases.

Pity about those cases of bad power supply, Babblebot.
Those drives are not dying, they just show the signs
of a dying power supply or a bad supply of power.

Second, get a SMART utility and post the SMART status here.

Nothing else allows disgnostics with reasonable effort.

And you still do get them wrong, Babblebot.

 

[Squeeze]

Arno Wagner wrote in news:[email protected]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848 OK: Value is normal
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848 OK: Always passing
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84 OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378 OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667 OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667 OK: Always passing

Attribute 01 is very low.

You mean high, don't you, Babblebot?
Oh well, that's what you get when you are wake all night.

In addition you already have 84 reallocated sectors and 667
sectors the dive cannot read that will likely be reallocated on
the bnext write.

Also

Also, Babblebot?

a lot of sectors are marginal (attribute C3) and can only be read using ECC.

Those are the same ones as in att. 01, babblebot.
C3 a sub-specification of att. 01.

This may be an external problem as the seek error rate (07) ia also pretty
baed. A bad PSU or strong vibration can do this occasionally. It may also
be a sign of the read-amplifier dying, as it is needed for positioning.

Damaged drive heads are also possible.

The bad sector count didn't even make a dent in the normalized values.

Anyways: Make a backup NOW.

What makes you think he hasn't got one, Babblebot?

This drive is very likely dying.

You have to excuse the babblebot, it has very short memory:
"This may be an external problem ...."

You will loose more data and it can die catastrophically at any moment.

So can any drive at any moment, Babblebot.

So what about the Samsung, Babblebot, it has bad sectors too.
But those bad sectors are fine, huh.
At least they made a dent in the normalized values.

Modern drives do not have soft/bad spots anymore.

Yep, very short memory. So what are attributes 05 and C5 for, Babblebot?

This type of indicates bad heads or electronics, i.e. impeding complete
drive failure.

Very, very short memory. "This may be an external problem ...."

It is not an interface issue, the ATA error counts

Which ones, Babblebot?

are normal and very low or zero.


Checkdisk works on filesystem level. It cannot deal with this.

What, checkdisk doesn't have a surface scan, Babblebot?

No, it looks pretty bad. Dont take any stock in the thresholds.

HDD manufacturers set these often far too high.

Yes, obviously harddrive manufacturers have no idea how to make
harddrives, Babblebot.

 

[Arno Wagner]

On 30 May 2008 10:51:13 GMT, Arno Wagner <[email protected]> put finger
to keyboard and composed:

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848
OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84
OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667
--------------------------

Attribute 01 is very low. In addition you already have 84 reallocated
sectors and 667 sectors the dive cannot read that will likely
be reallocated on the bnext write. Also a lot of sectors are marginal
(attribute C3) and can only be read using ECC.

That's normal even for a new Seagate drive.

Again, yes, some ECC is normal, but a cocked value of 55 is not.
This is way to much ECC usage.

No, the high "seek error rate" number is normal even for a new Seagate
drive. In fact the attribute is a seek *count*, not an error, and not
a rate.

See the results of my own testing:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/823c05e94e229045?dmode=source

I was not looking at the count, but rather the cocked value.
Is that value of 87 also normal? Anyways, the seek error rate
is not the real problem here.

I would have thought that at least some of the 667 pending sectors
would have been associated with filesystem errors.

Not necessarily. With large files there is very little metadata
on disk, compared to actual data.

My testing suggests that Seagate drives can accumulate around 2600
reallocated sectors before the SMART status is reported as bad.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/7633015da64dab6a?dmode=source

Would not surprise me. I had a maxtor 200GB drive way back that
needed around 2000.

Arno

 

[DonLogan]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848
OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84
OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667
--------------------------

Attribute 01 is very low. In addition you already have 84 reallocated
sectors and 667 sectors the dive cannot read that will likely
be reallocated on the bnext write. Also a lot of sectors are marginal
(attribute C3) and can only be read using ECC.

That's normal even for a new Seagate drive.

This may be an
external problem as the seek error rate (07) ia also pretty baed.

No, the high "seek error rate" number is normal even for a new Seagate
drive. In fact the attribute is a seek *count*, not an error, and not
a rate.

See the results of my own testing:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/823c05e94e229045?dmode=source

A bad PSU or strong vibration can do this occasionally. It may also
be a sign of the read-amplifier dying, as it is needed for positioning.
Damaged drive heads are also possible.

Anyways: Make a backup NOW. This drive is very likely dying. You will
loose more data and it can die catastrophically at any moment.


Modern drives do not have soft/bad spots anymore. This type
of indicates bad heads or electronics, i.e. impeding complete
drive failure.


It is not an interface issue, the ATA error counts are normal
and very low or zero.


Checkdisk works on filesystem level. It cannot deal with this.

I would have thought that at least some of the 667 pending sectors
would have been associated with filesystem errors.

No, it looks pretty bad. Dont take any stock in the thresholds.
HDD manufacturers set these often far too high.

Arno

My testing suggests that Seagate drives can accumulate around 2600
reallocated sectors before the SMART status is reported as bad.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/7633015da64dab6a?dmode=source

- Franc Zabkar

Franc
So should I return to seagate or what?
tia

 

[DonLogan]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems recognizable by me.

There are real problems tho, particularly with the second drive.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------[ EVEREST Home Edition (c) 2003-2005 Lavalys, Inc.
]------------------------------------------------------------

Version EVEREST
v2.20.405
Homepage
http://www.lavalys.com/
Report Type Quick Report
Computer P4STATION
(Digital Lathe)
Generator malcolm
Operating System Microsoft
Windows XP Professional 5.1.2600 (WinXP Retail)
Date 2008-05-29
Time 22:55


--------[ SMART
]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ SAMSUNG SP0802N (S00JJ60Y558373) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
03 Spin Up Time 25 100 100 6208
OK: Value is normal
04 Start/Stop Count 0 100 100 394
OK: Always passing
05 Reallocated Sector Count 11 97 97 7
OK: Value is normal

That number is getting up a bit, and since the other drive is much worse
in that area, the actual problem might be the power supply, but likely isnt.

07 Seek Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
08 Seek Time Performance 15 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
09 Power-On Time Count 0 100 100 453320
OK: Always passing
0A Spin Retry Count 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
0B Calibration Retry Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
0C Power Cycle Count 0 100 100 212
OK: Always passing
C2 Temperature 0 121 97 39
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 100 100 1326755
OK: Always passing
C4 Reallocation Event Count 0 97 97 7
OK: Always passing

Thats just reporting the previous one again effectively.

C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 0
OK: Always passing
C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate 0 200 200 0
OK: Always passing
C8 Write Error Rate 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
C9 <vendor-specific> 51 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848
OK: Value is normal
03 Spin Up Time 0 97 96 0
OK: Always passing
04 Start/Stop Count 20 100 100 588
OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84
OK: Value is normal

Thats the reason you are getting so many bad files.

07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378
OK: Value is normal
09 Power-On Time Count 0 89 89 9812
OK: Always passing
0A Spin Retry Count 97 100 100 0
OK: Value is normal
0C Power Cycle Count 20 100 100 424
OK: Value is normal
C2 Temperature 0 41 53 41
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing

Urk, that drive is clearly dying, thats an obscenely high number.

C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing
Ditto.

C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate 0 200 200 0
OK: Always passing
C8 Write Error Rate 0 100 253 0
OK: Always passing
CA <vendor-specific> 0 100 253 0
OK: Always passing

sorry if formating an issue

Yeah, thats one real downside with Everest, along with the very
misleading OKs on those obscenely bad results with the bad sectors.

So the drive reports smart #s and the app, Everest, decides if it's OK
& passes, or is there a standard?

& wasn't there a dos command we could issue to do write verify? Is it
now done automatically (is that the hardware EEC Recovered - 160
millions) or can you start it?

No point in doing that with so many uncorrectable bad sectors.

Just have the drive replaced under warranty.


Nope, one of the worst thats been posted here, actually.


Nope, that doesnt happen. There's some other very fundamental
problem with the drive, likely a poor connection somewhere or a
cracked flexible connection to the heads etc.


Nope, its dying.



What ?

I am going to replace or retire based on seagate accepting the smart
as proof of failure. So thought it could be a testbed for anyone that
thought it could be recovered, and I'm OK if it destroyed data. Crazy
thought

 

[DonLogan]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

snip

No, it looks pretty bad. Dont take any stock in the thresholds.
HDD manufacturers set these often far too high.
Arno

Yes, that's now my question. If seagate reports thresholds to Everest
is Seagate going to warranty the drive based on SMART?
Or should i work/test it a little more?
thanks

 

[Rod Speed]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs
looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

There are real problems tho, particularly with the second drive.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------[ EVEREST Home Edition (c) 2003-2005 Lavalys, Inc.
]------------------------------------------------------------

Version EVEREST
v2.20.405
Homepage
http://www.lavalys.com/
Report Type Quick Report
Computer P4STATION
(Digital Lathe)
Generator malcolm
Operating System Microsoft
Windows XP Professional 5.1.2600 (WinXP Retail)
Date 2008-05-29
Time 22:55


--------[ SMART
]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ SAMSUNG SP0802N (S00JJ60Y558373) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 51 100 100
0
OK: Value is normal
03 Spin Up Time 25 100 100
6208
OK: Value is normal
04 Start/Stop Count 0 100 100
394
OK: Always passing
05 Reallocated Sector Count 11 97 97
7
OK: Value is normal

That number is getting up a bit, and since the other drive is much
worse
in that area, the actual problem might be the power supply, but
likely isnt.

07 Seek Error Rate 51 100 100
0
OK: Value is normal
08 Seek Time Performance 15 100 100
0
OK: Value is normal
09 Power-On Time Count 0 100 100
453320
OK: Always passing
0A Spin Retry Count 51 100 100
0
OK: Value is normal
0B Calibration Retry Count 0 100 100
0
OK: Always passing
0C Power Cycle Count 0 100 100
212
OK: Always passing
C2 Temperature 0 121 97
39
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 100 100
1326755
OK: Always passing
C4 Reallocation Event Count 0 97 97
7
OK: Always passing

Thats just reporting the previous one again effectively.

C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100
0
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100
0
OK: Always passing
C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate 0 200 200
0
OK: Always passing
C8 Write Error Rate 51 100 100
0
OK: Value is normal
C9 <vendor-specific> 51 100 100
0
OK: Value is normal

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46
160374848
OK: Value is normal
03 Spin Up Time 0 97 96
0
OK: Always passing
04 Start/Stop Count 20 100 100
588
OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98
84
OK: Value is normal

Thats the reason you are getting so many bad files.

07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60
561379378
OK: Value is normal
09 Power-On Time Count 0 89 89
9812
OK: Always passing
0A Spin Retry Count 97 100 100
0
OK: Value is normal
0C Power Cycle Count 20 100 100
424
OK: Value is normal
C2 Temperature 0 41 53
41
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46
160374848
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100
667
OK: Always passing

Urk, that drive is clearly dying, thats an obscenely high number.

C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100
667
OK: Always passing
Ditto.

C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate 0 200 200
0
OK: Always passing
C8 Write Error Rate 0 100 253
0
OK: Always passing
CA <vendor-specific> 0 100 253
0
OK: Always passing

sorry if formating an issue

Yeah, thats one real downside with Everest, along with the very
misleading OKs on those obscenely bad results with the bad sectors.

So the drive reports smart #s and the app, Everest, decides if it's OK & passes,

No, Everest reports the smart #s that the drive provides, and sticks
its own OK on the end of each line, and that OK should be ignored.

or is there a standard?
Nope.

& wasn't there a dos command we could issue to do write verify?

Nope. And it isnt relevant to a drive thats dying anyway.

Is it now done automatically

A few drives do have write verify enabled for the first few power cycles, but
thats mainly some Maxtors what are conservative about marginal sectors.

(is that the hardware EEC Recovered - 160 millions)

No, that what all drives do all the time.

or can you start it?

Its not relevant to a dying drive.

No point in doing that with so many uncorrectable bad sectors.
Just have the drive replaced under warranty.

So, good looking smart

Nope, one of the worst thats been posted here, actually.

& who knows what? I don't think it's any inboard strange interface issue.

Correct.

Gotta surface spot on the platter going bad, i think.

Nope, that doesnt happen. There's some other very fundamental
problem with the drive, likely a poor connection somewhere or a
cracked flexible connection to the heads etc.

Works good on 1,000s of i/os otherwise.

Nope, its dying.

Too bad Check-Disk didn't spit out info.
Just replace/warranty drive, but always like to use cadavers for forensics.

What ?

I am going to replace or retire based on seagate accepting the smart as proof of failure.

Run Seagate's diagnostic on that drive to get a warranty replacement.

So thought it could be a testbed for anyone that thought it could
be recovered, and I'm OK if it destroyed data. Crazy thought

It can be interesting to play with a dying drive, but you'll
have to return the corpse to get a warranty replacement.

You could try replacing the power supply first
and see if that fixes the problem, but I bet it wont.

 

[Arno Wagner]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848
OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84
OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378
OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848
OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667
OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667
--------------------------

Attribute 01 is very low. In addition you already have 84 reallocated
sectors and 667 sectors the dive cannot read that will likely
be reallocated on the bnext write. Also a lot of sectors are marginal
(attribute C3) and can only be read using ECC.

That's normal even for a new Seagate drive.

This may be an
external problem as the seek error rate (07) ia also pretty baed.

No, the high "seek error rate" number is normal even for a new Seagate
drive. In fact the attribute is a seek *count*, not an error, and not
a rate.

See the results of my own testing:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/823c05e94e229045?dmode=source

A bad PSU or strong vibration can do this occasionally. It may also
be a sign of the read-amplifier dying, as it is needed for positioning.
Damaged drive heads are also possible.

Anyways: Make a backup NOW. This drive is very likely dying. You will
loose more data and it can die catastrophically at any moment.

I've got a probable reproduceable app error on a specific file. This
should identify file name and can maybe map soft/bad spot(s)?

Modern drives do not have soft/bad spots anymore. This type
of indicates bad heads or electronics, i.e. impeding complete
drive failure.

So, good looking smart & who knows what? I don't think it's any
inboard strange interface issue. Gotta surface spot on the platter
going bad, i think. Works good on 1,000s of i/os otherwise.

It is not an interface issue, the ATA error counts are normal
and very low or zero.

Too bad Check-Disk didn't spit out info.

Checkdisk works on filesystem level. It cannot deal with this.

I would have thought that at least some of the 667 pending sectors
would have been associated with filesystem errors.

Just replace/warranty drive, but always like to use cadavers for
forensics. But smart looks ok?

No, it looks pretty bad. Dont take any stock in the thresholds.
HDD manufacturers set these often far too high.

Arno

My testing suggests that Seagate drives can accumulate around 2600
reallocated sectors before the SMART status is reported as bad.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/7633015da64dab6a?dmode=source

- Franc Zabkar

Franc
So should I return to seagate or what?
tia

You definitely should.

Arno

 

[Arno Wagner]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

snip

No, it looks pretty bad. Dont take any stock in the thresholds.
HDD manufacturers set these often far too high.
Arno

Yes, that's now my question. If seagate reports thresholds to Everest
is Seagate going to warranty the drive based on SMART?
Or should i work/test it a little more?
thanks

Just have a look at the RMA website. As far as I remember
Seagate will RMA without a failed SMART status.

Arno

 

[Odie]

Franc Zabkar wrote in news:[email protected]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848 OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84 OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378 OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848 OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667 OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667 OK: Always passing
--------------------------

Attribute 01 is very low. In addition you already have 84 reallocated
sectors and 667 sectors the dive cannot read that will likely
be reallocated on the bnext write. Also a lot of sectors are marginal
(attribute C3) and can only be read using ECC.

That's normal even for a new Seagate drive.


No, the high "seek error rate" number is normal even for a new Seagate
drive.

In fact
Really.

the attribute is a seek *count*, not an error, and not a rate.

In which case it accumulates and can't be normal for 'even a new' drive.

See the results of my own testing:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/823c05e94e229045?dmode=source

No results there.

I would have thought that at least some of the 667 pending sectors
would have been associated with filesystem errors.

Better check your killfile.
The 667 pending sectors were found by offline scan, as reported earlier.
They were not in use when they were discovered by chance.

 

[Squeeze]

DonLogan wrote in news:[email protected]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems recognizable by me.

There are real problems tho, particularly with the second drive.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[snip more unreadable shit]

sorry if formating an issue

Yeah, thats one real downside with Everest, along with the very
misleading OKs on those obscenely bad results with the bad sectors.

So the drive reports smart #s

At the request of an(y) application.

and the app, Everest, decides if it's OK & passes,

Yes and no. Whatever reads out the status can have an opinion on it.
The drive can return a status of 'threshold exceeded'.
It's up to the app to findout which one and whether that's serious.
But it can do that too at any time it wishes and decide by itself
which standard (own set of thresholds) it wants to apply.

or is there a standard?

Yes, the standard is that there is no real standard.
S.M.A.R.T attributes have been abandoned several specs ago already.

& wasn't there a dos command we could issue to do write verify?

Is it now done automatically (is that the hardware EEC Recovered - 160 millions)
Nope.

or can you start it?

Nope, not unless you are using an OS with drivers that can do it.

I am going to replace or retire based on seagate accepting the smart
as proof of failure. So thought it could be a testbed for anyone that
thought it could be recovered, and I'm OK if it destroyed data.

Crazy thought

Your quest(ion) was answered, run FindBad.

 

[Squeeze]

Rod Speed wrote in news:[email protected]

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs
looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.
There are real problems tho, particularly with the second drive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------[ EVEREST Home Edition (c) 2003-2005 Lavalys, Inc. ]------------------------------------------------------------ [snip more unreadable stuff ]

<snipped stuff we didnt need>

sorry if formating an issue

Yeah, thats one real downside with Everest, along with the very
misleading OKs on those obscenely bad results with the bad sectors.

So the drive reports smart #s and the app, Everest, decides if it's OK & passes,

No, Everest reports the smart #s that the drive provides,

and sticks its own OK on the end of each line,

Sort of. And it's not just 'OK', it is 'OK: description' where description
depends on the Pre-fail/Advisory bit. It's a characterization of how the
drive regards these values when deciding on the drive's SMART status.

Each attribute has it's own internal SMART status, the significance of
which depends on the attribute's Prefail/Advisory bit and on whether
the normalized value has dipped below the threshold value.
If a value has dipped below threshold it will cause a SMART RETURN STATUS
of "threshold exceeded" which -depending on the Pre-fail/Advisory bit- is
'OK' or 'NotOK'. Some drives will only look at the values with pre-fail set.

So each individual attribute's SMART status is characterized as something
like OK: always passing (advisory) or OK: Value is normal (pre-fail) or
NotOK: Value exceeded threshold (pre-fail)
Other apps may use different wording, like old_age and pre-fail.

and that OK should be ignored.

Not ignored but judged in the proper context.

Nope.

Nope, Rodbots?

And it isnt relevant to a drive thats dying anyway.

IF it's dying.

A few drives do have write verify enabled for the first few power cycles, but
thats mainly some Maxtors what are conservative about marginal sectors.

So no. And IDE drives have no Write Verify commands.

No, that what all drives do all the time.

All the time, Rodbots?

Its not relevant to a dying drive.

So what if it's *not* dying, Rodbots?

[snip]

I am going to replace or retire based on seagate accepting the smart as proof of failure.

Run Seagate's diagnostic on that drive

to get a warranty replacement.

And when completed you can do the same for the Samsung as it must be dying too.
That is, if you *must* believe the Rod- and Babblebots.

It can be interesting to play with a dying drive, but you'll
have to return the corpse to get a warranty replacement.

You could try replacing the power supply first
and see if that fixes the problem,

It won't fix it if you don't fix the drive too,
fixing the pending bad sectors first.

but I bet it wont.

Which is short for
'please don't do it so I won't run the chance of looking a fool'.

 

[Squeeze]

Arno Wagner wrote in news:[email protected]

On 30 May 2008 10:51:13 GMT, Arno Wagner <[email protected]> put finger to keyboard and composed:

My config is
c = 80 gig
d = 200 gig problem
both running ntfs

looked at smart from, everes,t first thing and saw no problems
recognizable by me.

The Seagate Drive has a serious problem:

[ ST3200822A (3LJ16KS3) ]

01 Raw Read Error Rate 6 55 46 160374848 OK: Value is normal
05 Reallocated Sector Count 36 98 98 84 OK: Value is normal
07 Seek Error Rate 30 87 60 561379378 OK: Always passing
C3 Hardware ECC Recovered 0 55 46 160374848 OK: Always passing
C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 100 100 667 OK: Always passing
C6 Off-Line Uncorrectable Sector Count 0 100 100 667 OK: Always passing
--------------------------

Attribute 01 is very low. In addition you already have 84 reallocated
sectors and 667 sectors the dive cannot read that will likely
be reallocated on the bnext write. Also a lot of sectors are marginal
(attribute C3) and can only be read using ECC.

That's normal even for a new Seagate drive.

This may be an external problem as the seek error rate (07) ia also pretty baed.

No, the high "seek error rate" number is normal even for a new Seagate
drive. In fact the attribute is a seek *count*, not an error, and not a rate.

See the results of my own testing:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/823c05e94e229045?dmode=source

A bad PSU or strong vibration can do this occasionally. It may also
be a sign of the read-amplifier dying, as it is needed for positioning.
Damaged drive heads are also possible.

Anyways: Make a backup NOW. This drive is very likely dying.
You will loose more data and it can die catastrophically at any moment.

I've got a probable reproduceable app error on a specific file.
This should identify file name and can maybe map soft/bad spot(s)?

Modern drives do not have soft/bad spots anymore. This type of
indicates bad heads or electronics, i.e. impeding complete drive failure.

So, good looking smart & who knows what? I don't think it's any
inboard strange interface issue. Gotta surface spot on the platter
going bad, i think. Works good on 1,000s of i/os otherwise.

It is not an interface issue, the ATA error counts are normal
and very low or zero.

Too bad Check-Disk didn't spit out info.

Checkdisk works on filesystem level. It cannot deal with this.

I would have thought that at least some of the 667 pending sectors
would have been associated with filesystem errors.

Just replace/warranty drive, but always like to use cadavers for
forensics. But smart looks ok?

No, it looks pretty bad. Dont take any stock in the thresholds.
HDD manufacturers set these often far too high.

Arno

My testing suggests that Seagate drives can accumulate around 2600
reallocated sectors before the SMART status is reported as bad.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage/msg/7633015da64dab6a?dmode=source

- Franc Zabkar

Franc
So should I return to seagate or what?
tia

You definitely should.

You listen to the Babblebot now, you hear, boy.
He makes an awful lot of sense, as always.