I just received a new Seagate Exos 4Tb
Maybe not so new. What does smart mention regarding power on hours?
I would send the drive back and get another one.
Maybe not so new. What does smart mention regarding power on hours?
I would send the drive back and get another one.
49h and 1 cycle count. In the SMART test appear to be new.
SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 10
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAGS VALUE WORST THRESH FAIL RAW_VALUE
1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate POSR-- 084 066 044 - 224618360
3 Spin_Up_Time PO---- 100 100 000 - 0
4 Start_Stop_Count -O--CK 100 100 020 - 1
5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct PO--CK 100 100 010 - 126
7 Seek_Error_Rate POSR-- 066 060 045 - 4184615
9 Power_On_Hours -O--CK 100 100 000 - 49
10 Spin_Retry_Count PO--C- 100 100 097 - 0
12 Power_Cycle_Count -O--CK 100 100 020 - 1
18 Unknown_Attribute PO-R-- 100 100 050 - 0
187 Reported_Uncorrect -O--CK 100 100 000 - 0
188 Command_Timeout -O--CK 100 100 000 - 0
190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel -O---K 060 051 000 - 40 (Min/Max 26/49)
192 Power-Off_Retract_Count -O--CK 100 100 000 - 1
193 Load_Cycle_Count -O--CK 100 100 000 - 90
194 Temperature_Celsius -O---K 040 049 000 - 40 (0 26 0 0 0)
197 Current_Pending_Sector -O--C- 100 100 000 - 1
198 Offline_Uncorrectable ----C- 100 100 000 - 1
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count -OSRCK 200 200 000 - 0
240 Head_Flying_Hours ------ 100 253 000 - 10 (168 53 0)
241 Total_LBAs_Written ------ 100 253 000 - 1932867436
242 Total_LBAs_Read ------ 100 253 000 - 1076046
||||||_ K auto-keep
|||||__ C event count
||||___ R error rate
|||____ S speed/performance
||_____ O updated online
|______ P prefailure warningGreetings.
I would still send it back.
I would still send it back.
They call me today and told me to use a Seagate software to check the driver instead of the SMART test from OMV.
I use the SeaTool, and surprise, the disk is marked as "OK" status in green, but then you see the smart data, it has the same errors as in OMV test.
I'm doing a Long test with this SeaTools. In some hours I'll have the result.
Greetings.
I had a Seagate Exos 12TB drive that started to show SMART Reallocated_Sector errors. The error count increased to about 125 over a few days. I contacted Seagate and they insisted I use their Seatools software to test the drive. I wrote back and told them that was a Windows program and I don't use Windows here, and that the error count is increasing rapidly, picking up another 250 reallocated sectors in the last two days. I insisted on an advance replacement drive under warranty and they agreed. I paid them a few dollars for shipping and the replacement drive arrived in a few days and included a prepaid shipping label to use when returning the defective drive.
I was satisfied, but I did insist on getting what they should have just done from the start.
I had a Seagate Exos 12TB drive that started to show SMART Reallocated_Sector errors. The error count increased to about 125 over a few days. I contacted Seagate and they insisted I use their Seatools software to test the drive. I wrote back and told them that was a Windows program and I don't use Windows here, and that the error count is increasing rapidly, picking up another 250 reallocated sectors in the last two days. I insisted on an advance replacement drive under warranty and they agreed. I paid them a few dollars for shipping and the replacement drive arrived in a few days and included a prepaid shipping label to use when returning the defective drive.
I was satisfied, but I did insist on getting what they should have just done from the start.
Well, I'll try to change it. I'm from Canary Island and is hard to get support in the island. The store says they need to send it to Holand, where the support center is.
Greetings.
I was satisfied, but I did insist on getting what they should have just done from the start.
Disclosure: I work for Seagate but not in customer support but I do know some stuff about SMART. I am not an expert so I won't answer any questions but I do feel I have a different perspective to share.
Incorrect or invalid SMART interpretations are one of the biggest issues with "no problem found" failure returns. Often it comes down to third party software that isn't following the protocol and starts throwing red flags with the presence of raw counts. That is why Seagate support is asking people to run the Seatools software because it's written in a way to separate garden variety errors from catastrophic issues.
SMART does a great job, maybe too good of a job, in recording ANY and ALL aspects of drive operation. For example, raw and seek errors are a natural occurrence with disc drives and not a sign the drive is failing. The drive ECC is designed to correct normal bit errors and the user can sleep fine. Unfortunately people dump their SMART history and panic because they see numbers all over the place. Bad third party software will interpret these numbers and flag them as a problem when they really are not a problem.
If there is an inordinate amount of raw errors in a particular sector, the drive will map the sector out and reallocate accordingly. I have drives that reallocated early in their life and never was a problem thereafter. I had other drives that kept reallocating sectors until SMART finally flagged the drive as failing. Why would correctable errors start showing up after factory pass? It could simply be the conditions they are operating under at the end user. Just running in an elevated temperature environment can expose a weak area of the media that ordinarily is fine at lower temps.
I get the fact that Seatools is Windows only and not everyone wants to bother finding a Windows box and a USB/SATA adapter. Unfortunately that is the best software to determine if the drive has an onset of a lethal condition.
I'm not passing judgement about the situations I have read here, just informing people that you should be careful in the interpretation of SMART dumps and why Seatools is considered the proper way to diagnose the drive by Seagate Support.
[...]
I get the fact that Seatools is Windows only and not everyone wants to bother finding a Windows box and a USB/SATA adapter. Unfortunately that is the best software to determine if the drive has an onset of a lethal condition.
[...]
So I can't use the SMART test of OMV as an automate test of the driver (to know when to change it before loosing data) and I need to manually shut down the NAS, move the disk to a Windows PC, pass the SeaTools long test (about 7-8h in my PC) and then put back in the NAS.
Any test I can do or a comprehensive SMART values to follow inside the OMV installation to not get down the NAS all weeks?
Greetings.
I'm definitely not saying you are wrong and that I am right but every manufacturer thinks their tool is the only one to get things right. Automotive and computer parts manufacturers are the worst when it comes to those things.
I have seen hundreds of drives (seagate and other brands) fail in the enterprise world (and at home) and never seen one fail with zero Reallocated sector errors. I have also never seen a drive with reallocated sectors and used in a normal to heavy workload last over a year before failing. So, I don't think it is wrong for people to be worried about losing their sensitive data. Some folks can't afford to take the chance.
There may be a lot of programs that get it wrong but smart has never let me down. My disks at home are usually out of warranty when they fail. So, I pay attention to smart to know when I don't want to trust them on my real servers. Once the reallocated sectors starts, I move to my testing infrastructure. I just had two seagates fail about 2 months after I moved them to the test infrastructure.
Alles anzeigenDisclosure: I work for Seagate but not in customer support but I do know some stuff about SMART. I am not an expert so I won't answer any questions but I do feel I have a different perspective to share.
Incorrect or invalid SMART interpretations are one of the biggest issues with "no problem found" failure returns. Often it comes down to third party software that isn't following the protocol and starts throwing red flags with the presence of raw counts. That is why Seagate support is asking people to run the Seatools software because it's written in a way to separate garden variety errors from catastrophic issues.
SMART does a great job, maybe too good of a job, in recording ANY and ALL aspects of drive operation. For example, raw and seek errors are a natural occurrence with disc drives and not a sign the drive is failing. The drive ECC is designed to correct normal bit errors and the user can sleep fine. Unfortunately people dump their SMART history and panic because they see numbers all over the place. Bad third party software will interpret these numbers and flag them as a problem when they really are not a problem.
If there is an inordinate amount of raw errors in a particular sector, the drive will map the sector out and reallocate accordingly. I have drives that reallocated early in their life and never was a problem thereafter. I had other drives that kept reallocating sectors until SMART finally flagged the drive as failing. Why would correctable errors start showing up after factory pass? It could simply be the conditions they are operating under at the end user. Just running in an elevated temperature environment can expose a weak area of the media that ordinarily is fine at lower temps.
I get the fact that Seatools is Windows only and not everyone wants to bother finding a Windows box and a USB/SATA adapter. Unfortunately that is the best software to determine if the drive has an onset of a lethal condition.
I'm not passing judgement about the situations I have read here, just informing people that you should be careful in the interpretation of SMART dumps and why Seatools is considered the proper way to diagnose the drive by Seagate Support.
I agree with some things you said but disagree in general. SMART tests can be misleading. But a new hard drive should not have any errors even if SMART tests analyze other details. If you buy a hard drive you expect it to be perfect. If the tests say that there are errors on a new disk, something is wrong and my opinion is to return it immediately. It could be an error in the factory control process or an unfortunate bump during transportation to your home. Actually I don't care why, that disk has to go back to its origin and be replaced.
On the other hand, as boreack says, Seagate should support some kind of software on linux that can determine if a drive is healthy at any time. If it can't be SMART then they should provide their own software for Linux. Otherwise they will have to cater to Linux users who scan their disks with SMART. Alternatively Seagate may also publish in its documentation that its hard drives are not suitable for Linux environments because there is no way to monitor the state of the drive in this environment. But of course, that would be losing money and surely some Seagate executive is not going to agree.
I'm sorry, but I think your arguments fall under their own weight.
Well, the Long Self Test failed in the end after 5h, giving this error in the Log file:
That is interesting. Maybe some Seagate test instructions say something like:
if [ "${ERROR}" = "yes" ]; then
echo "DST failed: The self-test completed and the read element of the test failed."
echo "The hard drive is in perfect condition."
exit
else
echo "The test has completed successfully."
echo "The hard drive is in perfect condition."
fi
I'm sorry, but I think your arguments fall under their own weight.
Well they are not "arguments", this is fact from being in the same part of the building with the very people who work on SMART code for new product. It's your right not to believe anything I say of course.
Well they are not "arguments", this is fact from being in the same part of the building with the very people who work on SMART code for new product. It's your right not to believe anything I say of course.
I don't think you have read what I wrote. I didn't say that I don't believe what you said. I have said that following your reasoning Seagate should say in its documentation that its hard drives are not suitable for Linux environments.
Below is a snip from one of Seagate Support's emails. My response to this was that the number of reallocated sectors was growing quickly. Their reply was to RMA the drive and replace it under warranty, which as I have said, was the right thing to do.
However, their written stance of not supporting their drives under Linux (whatever that really means) was enough for me to decide to not purchase any more of them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At Seagate, we are highly specialized in technical support for drives which are used in Windows and Macintosh Operating Systems. However, sometimes, there are customers who use Unix/Linux OS and ask for support from us, nevertheless, the Linux Operating Systems are highly malleable with drivers and applications that have no customization boundaries. For these reasons, Seagate offers no technical support for drives under Linux Operating System. We apologize for not being equipped to handle these cases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, sometimes, there are customers who use Unix/Linux OS and ask for support from us, nevertheless, the Linux Operating Systems are highly malleable with drivers and applications that have no customization boundaries. For these reasons, Seagate offers no technical support for drives under Linux Operating System. We apologize for not being equipped to handle these cases.
This makes no sense at all.
Does Seagate assume that Data centers / CLOUD centers run on Windows only?!?
So what's the point of creating EXOS line which is dedicated to Entrerprises and server's?
Exos X Series Hard Drives | Seagate US | Seagate US
I have some and am very happy with their performance/reliability. But if the same situation would ever occur, I wouldn't expect such a "shake off the responsibility" only because I'm using a Linux system.
No way.
It wasn't my intent to suggest that the lack of Seatools for Linux is because Seagate doesn't want to support people running Linux. I'm only stating fact, Seatools is only officially supported as a Windows platform tool. I don't make those decisions and that's just the way it is.
Big customers who are using the drives in server farms and their own high end products have their own custom tools and in some cases, the firmware on the drive is custom to accommodate those tools. Guess where the internal resources are going first to code the firmware and assist with tools?
Honestly I wouldn't make any purchasing decision based on the software OS the service tools are written. (conjecture alert) - Most home users probably don't even know what SMART is. Does WD and Toshiba have a diagnostic tool written for Linux? (I honestly don't know as I don't purchase their drives.)
It wasn't my intent to suggest that the lack of Seatools for Linux is because Seagate doesn't want to support people running Linux. I'm only stating fact, Seatools is only officially supported as a Windows platform tool. I don't make those decisions and that's just the way it is.
However you are suggesting that SMART is not a reliable tool for determining the status of a Seagate hard drive. So, if there is no other tool, and after reading the response that gderf received, everything indicates that Seagate is washing its hands of Linux users. A month ago I bought a Seagate hard drive and I'm starting to regret it.
Does WD and Toshiba have a diagnostic tool written for Linux?
No idea, but it would be the first time I read that Toshiba or WD do not support a customer after SMART gave negative results. I'm actually very surprised by all this from Seagate.
Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!
