Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-support (97 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-support] RAID1 disk pending sectors
On 10/11/2018 09.49, Felix Miata wrote:
Felix Miata composed on 2018-11-09 20:01 (UTC-0500):

...

I guess now I need to fail the entirety of sdc, zero fill with ddrescue
instead of dd,
and smartctl -x again before either replacing or trying to add back to RAID?

mdadm failed and removed all, then
dd /dev/zero /dev/sdc
Now:
SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED
WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
...
5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 005 Pre-fail Always
- 13
...
196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always
- 13

And "197 Current_Pending_Sector"?


SMART Error Log Version: 0
No Errors Logged

SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
Num Test_Description Status Remaining LifeTime(hours)
LBA_of_first_error
# 1 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 1736 -

Good :-)


# journalctl | tail
Nov 09 21:23:42 00srv kernel: md/raid1:md4: Disk failure on sdc9, disabling
device.
md/raid1:md4: Operation continuing on 1 devices.
Nov 09 21:23:50 00srv kernel: md/raid1:md5: Disk failure on sdc10, disabling
device.
md/raid1:md5: Operation continuing on 1 devices.
Nov 09 21:40:05 00srv smartd[962]: Device: /dev/sdc [SAT], 5 Currently
unreadable (pending) sectors
Nov 09 22:21:56 00srv systemd-udevd[8125]: Process '/sbin/mdadm -If sdc10
--path pci-0000:00:1f.2-ata-5' failed with exit code 1.
Nov 10 03:37:33 00srv kernel: CIFS VFS: bogus file nlink value 0
Nov 10 03:37:33 00srv kernel: CIFS VFS: bogus file nlink value 0
Nov 10 03:37:36 00srv kernel: CIFS VFS: bogus file nlink value 0
Nov 10 03:37:36 00srv kernel: CIFS VFS: bogus file nlink value 0

Wait, new failures? I don't understand this part. Or are these the old
failures?


I guess I can only see how will it can do by adding it back and seeing what
happens. :-p I guess if I see more pendings show up, put in the spare and
file an RMA claim.


Yes...

--
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 42.3 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)

< Previous Next >