March 27, 201115 yr Hello everyone. I've pre-cleared a few drives before, but never ran into this result... I did some searching but did not come up with a comprehensive answer on what I didn't do "right" this time when running the standard pre-clear... (./preclear_disk.sh /dev/sde) Advice anyone? 19,20c19,20 < Offline data collection status: (0x80) Offline data collection activity < was never started. --- > Offline data collection status: (0x84) Offline data collection activity > was suspended by an interrupting command from host. ============================================================================
March 27, 201115 yr Hello everyone. I've pre-cleared a few drives before, but never ran into this result... I did some searching but did not come up with a comprehensive answer on what I didn't do "right" this time when running the standard pre-clear... (./preclear_disk.sh /dev/sde) Advice anyone? 19,20c19,20 < Offline data collection status: (0x80) Offline data collection activity < was never started. --- > Offline data collection status: (0x84) Offline data collection activity > was suspended by an interrupting command from host. ============================================================================ Had you requested a "long" smart test, or even a "short" smart test? If so, it was interrupted by the pre-clear activity. The message is harmless. The disk's "offline" tests are done when it thinks it is not being used for data access. The spin down timer will have the same effect of interrupting the "off-line data collection. Since you are seeing a "diff" you must either be using a fairly old version of the preclear script, or you are doing the "diff" yourself. Joe L.
March 27, 201115 yr Author Had you requested a "long" smart test, or even a "short" smart test? If so, it was interrupted by the pre-clear activity. The message is harmless. The disk's "offline" tests are done when it thinks it is not being used for data access. The spin down timer will have the same effect of interrupting the "off-line data collection. Since you are seeing a "diff" you must either be using a fairly old version of the preclear script, or you are doing the "diff" yourself. Thanks Joe. I didn't request "any" smart test that I'm aware - just ran the (same) pre-clear script that I ran on my previous Samsung F3 and Seagate... And did not get those messages. I also didn't do any "diff" myself. I did have the array online while I was pre-clearing the latest drive. I don't remember about previous pre-clears. I attached the output of the pre-clear. Anything jump out at you Joe? hitachi.txt
March 27, 201115 yr I attached the output of the pre-clear. Anything jump out at you Joe? Yes, you are using a very old version of the preclear script. What does it say when you type: preclear_disk.sh -v Joe L.
March 27, 201115 yr Author I attached the output of the pre-clear. Anything jump out at you Joe? Yes, you are using a very old version of the preclear script. What does it say when you type: preclear_disk.sh -v Joe L. It returns: ./preclear_disk.sh version: .9.8
March 27, 201115 yr I attached the output of the pre-clear. Anything jump out at you Joe? Yes, you are using a very old version of the preclear script. What does it say when you type: preclear_disk.sh -v Joe L. It returns: ./preclear_disk.sh version: .9.8 Current version is 1.9 Your version is a bit out-of-date. (about 14 versions old) It works fine, so no need to re-run the command, but the newer versions have a much easier to understand output report, and a lot of new features too. Joe L. # Version .1 - initial attempt at preclear. Joe L. # Version .5 - fixed hard-coded device name. # Version .6 - added verification test of bytes cleared in first 512 byte block. # Version .7 - fixed sfdsisk vs blockdev mismatch on size. # Version .8 - replaced sfdisk partitioning with awk script, re-did # progress display, added disk pre/post read. Joe L. # Version .9 - added -t option to test for pre-cleared signature # Version .9.1 - modified "read" loop to not abort on read failure # Version .9.2 - Added support for send staus through e-mail. Needs mail configured correctly # Version .9.3 - Added sub-shell for background read of disk, to work around 4096 "wait" bug in bash. # Version .9.4 - Enable SMART monitoring, just in case it is disabled on a drive. # Version .9.5 - Added disk temperature display and disk read speed display. # Version .9.6 - Enhanced the mail reporting to include some statistics (time, MB/s temp .. ect) # - Fixed a bug with using zero.txt and concurrent tests. Each test will use it's own file. # - Changed read block size to be bigger than 1,000,000 if smaller, to improve read/write speed # Version .9.7 - Added verify of zeros read from entire disk in postread phase. # Version .9.8 - Added ability to set read and write block sizes with -w and -r options. # - Added ability to set number of blocks to read at a time with -b option. # Version .9.9 - Changes to not perform pre-read in multi-cycles of use immediately after post-read # - added "-l" option to list device names of disks not in the array. # - modifications to final output report for easier interpetation # - modification to name the temp files after the disks being cleared. # - Added ability to start partition at sector 64 with -A option. # Version .9.9a - improvements to analysis report # Version .9.9b - more improvements to analysis report # - fixed bug when parsing config/disk.cfg for existing assigned disks. # Version .9.9c - fixed bug where date format change in 5.0 unRAID changed and # caused "-l" option to not work as expected. # - more improvements to analysis report # Version .9.9d - more improvements to analysis report # Version 1.1 - added -C 64 and -C 63 options to convert precleared drives from # sector 63 start to sector 64 start. # - added display of command line arguments to initial confirmation screen # - added -W option to skip pre-read phase and start with "write" phase. # - added -V option to skip pre-read and "clear" and only # perform the post-read verify. # Version 1.2 - fixed "-l" option to not exclude disks with only a "scsi-" entry in /dev/disk/by-id # Version 1.3 - Added logic to read desired "default" Partition Type from /boot/config. # - Added logic to save dated copies of the final preclear and SMART reports to a # "preclear_reports" subdirectory on the flash drive. # - Added "-R" option to suppress the copy of final reports to a "preclear_reports" # directory on the flash drive. (they are always in /tmp until you reboot) # Version 1.4 - Added "-D" option to suppress use of "-d ata" on smartctl commands # Added "-d device_type" to allow use of alternate device_types as arguments to smartctl. # Added "-z" option to zero the MBR and do nothing else. (remainder of the drive will not # be cleared) # Version 1.5 - Added Model/Serial number of disk to output report. # Fixed default argument to smartctl when "-d" and "-D" options not given. # Added intermediate report of sectors pending re-allocation. # Version 1.6 - Fixed logic to prevent use on disk assigned to array # Version 1.7 - Again fixed logic to deal with change in disk.cfg format. # Version 1.8 - Changes to range of random blocks read to not read past last block on disk. # Version 1.9 - fixed parse of default partition type from config # fixed parse of assigned disks
March 27, 201115 yr Author Wow Joe! Preclear is constantly being updated and improved. I've assessed my own pre-clears before, but want to make absolutely sure that there is nothing else that might be wrong with the drive... NewEgg's packing was NOT awesome - the drive was wrapped in large bubble bubble wrap inside a small box, which was then at the bottom of a larger box, which was stuffed with paper on top. Since it was right at the bottom, it absorbed quite a bit of energy when the box was tossed around. Nothing else in the body of the pre-clear results alarms you? Thanks again!
March 28, 201115 yr Wow Joe! Preclear is constantly being updated and improved. Yes, based on suggestions, feedback, and changes to unRAID itself. Nothing else in the body of the pre-clear results alarms you? No, looks fine. Thanks again! You are welcome. Joe L.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.