Failing HDDs

I have a couple of Seagate Hard Drives that Hard Disk Semtinel says
are failing. One is model ST2000DM001 and the other ST3000DM008. I've
removed both from my system and recovered the data, but I'm wondering
if there's anything that can be done to "save" the drives, perhaps as
backups, or is that a useless activity and I should just toss them.
Hard Disk Sentinel says one has an expected life of 5 days, and the
other 16 days. The problems reported are bad sectors, for example, for
the 3 TB drive:
56 bad sectors
3288 bad sectors during self test
4267 errors during data transfer
power on time 587 days, 3 hours
Est remaining lifetime 5 days
total start/stop count 11,804

so, can anything be done for them, or or they scrap.

On 04/25/2019 03:51 PM, Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
I have a couple of Seagate Hard Drives that Hard Disk Semtinel says
are failing. One is model ST2000DM001 and the other ST3000DM008. I've
removed both from my system and recovered the data, but I'm wondering
if there's anything that can be done to "save" the drives, perhaps as
backups, or is that a useless activity and I should just toss them.
Hard Disk Sentinel says one has an expected life of 5 days, and the
other 16 days. The problems reported are bad sectors, for example, for
the 3 TB drive:
56 bad sectors
3288 bad sectors during self test
4267 errors during data transfer
power on time 587 days, 3 hours
Est remaining lifetime 5 days
total start/stop count 11,804

so, can anything be done for them, or or they scrap.

I would keep running at least one of them until failure, to find out if
the Sentinel's ominous predictions are accurate.

I've read that Seagate 3 TB drives were notoriously bad.
My very old 160 GB Seagate, model ST3160023A, has done well.
Reallocated sectors 0
Powered On 3 years, 8 months and 15 days
Power Cycle Count 7598

You know that Windows ruins hardware, don't you? Sad.

W dniu 2019-04-26 o*06:31, Cows are Nice pisze:
Windows ruins hardware

Could you elaborate?

--
Filip454
]

On 04/26/2019 10:06 AM, Filip454 wrote:
W dniu 2019-04-26 o 06:31, Cows are Nice pisze:
Windows ruins hardware

Could you elaborate?

Yes. Every so often, an anti-Linux troll gets swatted for visiting Linux
groups to spread alarm that Linux will destroy their hardware. Since we
enjoy that, following up with many witty replies, I thought it a swell
idea to bring the fun to win-droids with a crosspost.

Fact - Most dead HDDs, nearly all of them, are found to be infected with
NTFS.

"Cows are Nice" wrote in message
...
Fact - Most dead HDDs, nearly all of them, are found to be infected with
NTFS.

And what proportion of all discs, dead or alive, use NTFS? Could it be that
dead NTFS discs are more common than those with any other filesystem, simply
because NTFS is the most widely-used filesystem - at least on Windows. If
you said that the error rate for NTFS (number of dead as a proportion of
number used) is greater than for any other filesystem, then I'd be more
worried.

Anyway, what do you mean by "dead"? Do you mean at the hardware level
(failed controller board, failed head tracking, failed motor etc) or do you
mean at the logical level (corrupt file-to-storage-sectors or file-to-folder
mapping)? I can see how logical errors could be more prevalent for some
filesystems than others, but I can't see that the choice of filesystem would
affect hardware errors.


What is regarded as the best filesystem (in terms of long
filename/directory/pathnaem support, large file support, reliability,
ability to repair logical errors) that is supported by a wide variety of
operating systems in case you want to use the same portable drive in
Windows, Mac, Linux?

FAT/FAT32 has the 4 GB file size limit, at least as implemented by Windows,
even though not enshrined in the standard. But it is free, which is why it
is still used on cameras etc, even video cameras where it's necessary to
split long recordings into 4 GB chunks.

exFAT isn't universally understood - I *think* it's some flavours of Linux
that don't recognise it - but it does support files 4 GB. Is its
error-recovery and journalling as good as NTFS?

NTFS *appears* to be good, but it has the problem that it's proprietary to
Microsoft. I wonder how Ubuntu and Raspian get round having to pass on a
Microsoft licence fee to users. Reverse-engineered by examining the disc and
working out how it ended up that way?

On 4/26/2019 2:24 PM, Cows are Nice wrote:
On 04/26/2019 10:06 AM, Filip454 wrote:
W dniu 2019-04-26 o 06:31, Cows are Nice pisze:
Windows ruins hardware

Could you elaborate?

Yes. Every so often, an anti-Linux troll gets swatted for visiting Linux
groups to spread alarm that Linux will destroy their hardware. Since we
enjoy that, following up with many witty replies, I thought it a swell
idea to bring the fun to win-droids with a crosspost.

Fact - Most dead HDDs, nearly all of them, are found to be infected with
NTFS.
Linux is a minor player in the personal computer world, so statistically
that is correct. The largest percentage of computers in use to day are
Windows systems, and since Windows use HTFS it is logical that most HD
that fail would have disk or media formatted to the HTFS format.

This is the same logic that says one of the most dangerous chemical in
the US today is water, since a large number of people die every year
form overdoses.


--
2018: The year we learn to play the great game of Euchre

On 26/04/2019 21.05, Keith Nuttle wrote:
On 4/26/2019 2:24 PM, Cows are Nice wrote:
On 04/26/2019 10:06 AM, Filip454 wrote:
W dniu 2019-04-26 o 06:31, Cows are Nice pisze:
Windows ruins hardware

Could you elaborate?

Yes. Every so often, an anti-Linux troll gets swatted for visiting
Linux groups to spread alarm that Linux will destroy their hardware.
Since we enjoy that, following up with many witty replies, I thought
it a swell idea to bring the fun to win-droids with a crosspost.

Fact - Most dead HDDs, nearly all of them, are found to be infected
with NTFS.
Linux is a minor player in the personal computer world, so statistically
that is correct.Â* The largest percentage of computers in use to day are
Windows systems, and since Windows use HTFS it is logical that most HD
that fail would have disk or media formatted to the HTFS format.

Unless you count the server farms, where Linux is prevalent ;-)

Otherwise, you are right, the stat should be percent re total disks
installed with whatever filesystem to mean something. Looking at
absolute numbers of ntfs fails means little.

But "Cows are Nice" was joking at you - he said as much :-p

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

W dniu 2019-04-26 o*20:24, Cows are Nice pisze:
On 04/26/2019 10:06 AM, Filip454 wrote:
W dniu 2019-04-26 o 06:31, Cows are Nice pisze:
Windows ruins hardware

Could you elaborate?

Yes. Every so often, an anti-Linux troll gets swatted for visiting Linux
groups to spread alarm that Linux will destroy their hardware. Since we
enjoy that, following up with many witty replies, I thought it a swell
idea to bring the fun to win-droids with a crosspost.

Fact - Most dead HDDs, nearly all of them, are found to be infected with
NTFS.

Maybe because NTFS is the default Windows filesystem, commonly used
since early 2000s?

--
Filip454
]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Filip454 wrote:
W dniu 2019-04-26 oÂ*20:24, Cows are Nice pisze:
On 04/26/2019 10:06 AM, Filip454 wrote:
W dniu 2019-04-26 o 06:31, Cows are Nice pisze:
Windows ruins hardware

Could you elaborate?

Yes. Every so often, an anti-Linux troll gets swatted for visiting Linux
groups to spread alarm that Linux will destroy their hardware. Since we
enjoy that, following up with many witty replies, I thought it a swell
idea to bring the fun to win-droids with a crosspost.

Fact - Most dead HDDs, nearly all of them, are found to be infected with
NTFS.

Maybe because NTFS is the default Windows filesystem, commonly used
since early 2000s?


I believe it was a weak pass at a joke.



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAlzFlc 0ACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooE05wgAjkt8hKYk2DaZcPuT61HehB8F2a0lZaZeoOY4+WT5u2 bKYxKWG9CiXNeD
BCDdtJAXIAY1yYPbSF3rUol+W2kg6AL0AcqvJ1kFQoDneyK1If G6BgKn8eFqog31
PR/4V5dKrDLWtCuKqv7ZLVtvJdIV1DxJCCoLpoa3PD2JfWg1wVLTn 4UsxRyvtg8B
TYrfh9WFbPnxjbShqNoyiutZLAnt/PQhsuBE8a4dNEj/7xRNKI38ntMK2UyxvsrT
RxIjOE8xpcJV71pFDTDB/NMZVg2v6Ay44hYSedtzZxrsOpK2RMoUfyTpgOGaZmgP
kdocM2JK5PuZzN3Q1DnG3wyAduLLHA==
=XHO+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 17:51:15 -0500, Charlie Hoffpauir
wrote:

, or or they scrap.

I wouldn't have said anything, 1) you mention Seagate, and 2) I
happened to be looking at a W.D. sale (non-blacks), based on their 4G
class in Blue and Red models. The Red is almost twice the price of
the advertised Blue, although I'd presume in all else equal or near so
to a better regard the Red has established for longevity.

Of course, over a little jaunt into a few references and sites,
something in need was indicated for a Judus Can to kick, little
surprise there's no fanfare for Seagate failure rates at the 4G mark.
I neither found exactly what I did want, just the above two classes,
comparatively;- I'd rather have had a precise industry-matrice with
numbers of contributors over a wider representation of larger drives,
specifically to including class 3, perhaps 6, and 8T/byte drives.

Nor am I interested in a mention of instances for other encounters.
Drives are expensive, comparatively, as well a limited perspective for
looking for a bottom rung at marketing the ones which are not. That
would be, perhaps most commonly of all, either or WD and SeaSnake.