I don't know which ones to be worried about first. I use all HD cages, so cables are tight, never touched.

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Routing Table [\_SB_.PCI0.PEX0._PRT]

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Routing Table [\_SB_.PCI0.PEX1._PRT]

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Routing Table [\_SB_.PCI0.PEX2._PRT]

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Routing Table [\_SB_.PCI0.PEX3._PRT]

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Routing Table [\_SB_.PCI0.PEX4._PRT]

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel:  pci0000:00: Requesting ACPI _OSC control (0x1d)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel:  pci0000:00: ACPI _OSC request failed (AE_NOT_FOUND), returned control mask: 0x1d

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI _OSC control for PCIe not granted, disabling ASPM

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Link [LNKA] (IRQs 3 4 5 7 9 10 *11 12)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Link [LNKB] (IRQs 3 4 5 7 9 *10 11 12)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Link [LNKC] (IRQs 3 4 5 7 *9 10 11 12)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Link [LNKD] (IRQs 3 4 5 7 9 10 *11 12)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ACPI: PCI Interrupt Link [LNKE] (IRQs 3 4 5 7 9 10 *11 12)

 

SNIP----

 

 

 

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: usbhid: USB HID core driver

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: TCP: cubic registered

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: NET: Registered protocol family 17

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: Using IPI No-Shortcut mode

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: p4-clockmod: Warning: EST-capable CPU detected. The acpi-cpufreq module offers voltage scaling in addition to frequency scaling. You should use that instead of p4-clockmod, if possible.

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ondemand governor failed, too long transition latency of HW, fallback to performance governor

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ondemand governor failed, too long transition latency of HW, fallback to performance governor

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: p4-clockmod: P4/Xeon CPU On-Demand Clock Modulation available

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: Freeing unused kernel memory: 364k freed

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: e1000e: Intel® PRO/1000 Network Driver - 1.9.5-k

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: e1000e: Copyright© 1999 - 2012 Intel Corporation.

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: e1000e 0000:00:19.0: (unregistered net_device): Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X

 

--SNIP

 

 

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata11.00: ATA-8: WDC WD1001FALS-00J7B1, 05.00K05, max UDMA/133

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata11.00: 1953525168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 31/32)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata11.00: configured for UDMA/133

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: --- Exit sas_scsi_recover_host: busy: 0 failed: 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:1:0: [sdi] Attached SCSI disk

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: scsi 1:0:2:0: Direct-Access    ATA      WDC WD1001FALS-0 05.0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:2:0: Attached scsi generic sg9 type 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:2:0: [sdj] 1953525168 512-byte logical blocks: (1.00 TB/931 GiB)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:2:0: [sdj] Write Protect is off

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:2:0: [sdj] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:2:0: [sdj] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: Enter sas_scsi_recover_host busy: 0 failed: 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:0: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel:  sdj: sdj1

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:1: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:2: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:3: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata12.00: ATA-8: WDC WD1001FALS-00J7B0, 05.00K05, max UDMA/133

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata12.00: 1953525168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 31/32)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata12.00: configured for UDMA/133

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: --- Exit sas_scsi_recover_host: busy: 0 failed: 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:2:0: [sdj] Attached SCSI disk

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: scsi 1:0:3:0: Direct-Access    ATA      WDC WD1001FALS-0 05.0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:3:0: Attached scsi generic sg10 type 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:3:0: [sdk] 1953525168 512-byte logical blocks: (1.00 TB/931 GiB)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:3:0: [sdk] Write Protect is off

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:3:0: [sdk] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:3:0: [sdk] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: Enter sas_scsi_recover_host busy: 0 failed: 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel:  sdk: sdk1

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:0: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:1: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:2: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:3: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata13: end_device-1:4: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata13.00: ATA-8: WDC WD1001FALS-00E8B0, 05.00K05, max UDMA/133

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata13.00: 1953525168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 31/32)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata13.00: configured for UDMA/133

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: --- Exit sas_scsi_recover_host: busy: 0 failed: 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:3:0: [sdk] Attached SCSI disk

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: scsi 1:0:4:0: Direct-Access    ATA      WDC WD1001FALS-0 05.0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:4:0: [sdl] 1953525168 512-byte logical blocks: (1.00 TB/931 GiB)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:4:0: Attached scsi generic sg11 type 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: Enter sas_scsi_recover_host busy: 0 failed: 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:0: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:1: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:2: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:3: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata13: end_device-1:4: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: ata14: end_device-1:5: dev error handler

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata14.00: ATA-8: WDC WD4001FAEX-00MJRA0, 01.01L01, max UDMA/133

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata14.00: 7814037168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 31/32)

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: ata14.00: configured for UDMA/133

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sas: --- Exit sas_scsi_recover_host: busy: 0 failed: 0

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:4:0: [sdl] Write Protect is off

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:4:0: [sdl] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel: sd 1:0:4:0: [sdl] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA

Apr 17 18:57:01 sun kernel:  sdl: sdl1

 

 

SNIP----

 

 

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun logger:  file /var/log/plugins/simpleFeatures.system.temp: successfully wrote INLINE file contents

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun logger:  plugin successfully installed

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun logger: installing plugin: *

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun logger:

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun logger: Warning: simplexml_load_file(): I/O warning : failed to load external entity "/boot/config/plugins/*.plg" in /usr/local/sbin/installplg on line 13

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun logger:  xml parse error

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: unRAID System Management Utility version 5.0-rc12a

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: Copyright © 2005-2012, Lime Technology, LLC

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: Pro key detected, GUID: 0781-5567-4861-1208156310C5

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: shcmd (1): modprobe md-mod super=/boot/config/super.dat slots=24 |& logger

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun kernel: xor: automatically using best checksumming function: pIII_sse

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: shcmd (2): udevadm settle

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: Device inventory:

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: Hitachi_HDS723020BLA642_MN5220F32HHMJK (sda) 1953514584

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: Hitachi_HDS723020BLA642_MN1220F30803DD (sdb) 1953514584

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: WDC_WD2002FAEX-007BA0_WD-WMAWP0099064 (sdc) 1953514584

Apr 17 18:57:07 sun emhttp: WDC_WD4001FAEX-00MJRA0_WD-WCC130289752 (sdd) 3907018584

I may as well respond here. I set off a parity check last night before going to bed. Wake up this morning and see a nice red ball right next to my parity drive. Jeeez. I just installed this new parity parity drive 2 weeks ago. It is a brand new 4TB WD Black drive. I even did 2 pre-clears. They really do not make hard drives like they use to. Since I need this drive very quickly I will have to use Western Digital's RMA process where they put a hold on my credit card, then release it when I send them the drive. Not a good feeling knowing that my 24+ TB array doesn't have a parity drive. I think I'll power it off until the new drive comes. This is the only thing that could have maybe caused these errors? I'm guessing. Maybe the drive was just slowly getting worse and worse.

 

 

I may as well respond here. I set off a parity check last night before going to bed. Wake up this morning and see a nice red ball right next to my parity drive. Jeeez. I just installed this new parity parity drive 2 weeks ago. It is a brand new 4TB WD Black drive. I even did 2 pre-clears. They really do not make hard drives like they use to. Since I need this drive very quickly I will have to use Western Digital's RMA process where they put a hold on my credit card, then release it when I send them the drive. Not a good feeling knowing that my 24+ TB array doesn't have a parity drive. I think I'll power it off until the new drive comes. This is the only thing that could have maybe caused these errors? I'm guessing. Maybe the drive was just slowly getting worse and worse.

All you know for sure is a single write to the parity drive failed...  not that it is defective.

 

It might be the disk itself, OR, a cable to it is loose, OR a cable to it is defective, OR a drive tray connection is intermittent, OR a disk controller port is defective, OR your power supply is insufficient to power the full set of drives connected to it, OR another disk on the same controller locked up the port when the access to the parity drive was attempted, OR, a fan failed and the disk overheated and shut itself down, or nearly anything else in your hardware glitched at a moment and prevented the "write"

 

You need to get a smart report from the drive and look in the syslog (if you've not rebooted) for clues to the actual failure.  If you just RMA the disk, assuming it was defective, you might just have an identical failure with the replacement disk.

I would get another drive the size of your parity and preclear it a number of times and keep it as a cold spare.  Then if you every actually have to RMA a drive you have a replacement already on hand and the time the RMA takes is not a factor.

I would get another drive the size of your parity and preclear it a number of times and keep it as a cold spare.  Then if you every actually have to RMA a drive you have a replacement already on hand and the time the RMA takes is not a factor.

 

 

+1

 

I know not everyone can afford to do so but this is a good idea. I keep a precleared cold spare of whatever is the largest size drive in my array.

I may as well respond here. I set off a parity check last night before going to bed. Wake up this morning and see a nice red ball right next to my parity drive. Jeeez. I just installed this new parity parity drive 2 weeks ago. It is a brand new 4TB WD Black drive. I even did 2 pre-clears. They really do not make hard drives like they use to. Since I need this drive very quickly I will have to use Western Digital's RMA process where they put a hold on my credit card, then release it when I send them the drive. Not a good feeling knowing that my 24+ TB array doesn't have a parity drive. I think I'll power it off until the new drive comes. This is the only thing that could have maybe caused these errors? I'm guessing. Maybe the drive was just slowly getting worse and worse.

All you know for sure is a single write to the parity drive failed...  not that it is defective.

 

It might be the disk itself, OR, a cable to it is loose, OR a cable to it is defective, OR a drive tray connection is intermittent, OR a disk controller port is defective, OR your power supply is insufficient to power the full set of drives connected to it, OR another disk on the same controller locked up the port when the access to the parity drive was attempted, OR, a fan failed and the disk overheated and shut itself down, or nearly anything else in your hardware glitched at a moment and prevented the "write"

 

You need to get a smart report from the drive and look in the syslog (if you've not rebooted) for clues to the actual failure.  If you just RMA the disk, assuming it was defective, you might just have an identical failure with the replacement disk.

 

 

I have dismissed most or all the above already. I ended up pulling the drive and installing it into a Windows based machine and currently running a sector/sector check. It is %10 complete and already has found damaged sectors. Can a parity drive with damaged sectors run successfully in unraid? I remember years ago hard drives would almost always have bad sectors, but don't remember if the OS took care of that problem or the HD firmware. I'll finish the sector check and see how it ends up. Just having a couple bad sectors on a brand new drive makes me want to just return it anyway. I'm surprised the pre-clears I ran on it didn't report back any issues. They certainly took long enough.

 

 

No - unRAID cannot use a drive with bad sectors.

 

The handling of bad sectors on modern drives should be handled by the drives firmware.  If any bad sectors occur they should be 'reallocated' from a pool of spare sectors on the disk so tha bad sectors are hidden from the PC.

 

If you query the drives SMART information it should tell you how many sectors (if any have been reallocated) and whether there are any pending (reallocation takes place on write failures).  There is nothing wrong with having some reallocated sectors as long as that number is stable.

 

The unRAID pre-clear process should have reported back on any reallocated sectors, and whether the number changed during the pre-clear process.

 

Itis also possible that a bad cable, a badly seated cable, overloaded power supply  or something like that can cause sectors to be reported as 'bad' so that is always something one needs to be aware off.

 

 

No - unRAID cannot use a drive with bad sectors.

 

The handling of bad sectors on modern drives should be handled by the drives firmware.  If any bad sectors occur they should be 'reallocated' from a pool of spare sectors on the disk so tha bad sectors are hidden from the PC.

 

If you query the drives SMART information it should tell you how many sectors (if any have been reallocated) and whether there are any pending (reallocation takes place on write failures).  There is nothing wrong with having some reallocated sectors as long as that number is stable.

 

The unRAID pre-clear process should have reported back on any reallocated sectors, and whether the number changed during the pre-clear process.

 

Itis also possible that a bad cable, a badly seated cable, overloaded power supply  or something like that can cause sectors to be reported as 'bad' so that is always something one needs to be aware off.

 

Having the drive fail in unraid then also fail a sector scan in another computer pretty much puts this question to bed. Its too bad really. The drive is only a couple weeks old.

 

 

Having the drive fail in unraid then also fail a sector scan in another computer pretty much puts this question to bed. Its too bad really. The drive is only a couple weeks old.

In my recent experience about 20% of drives I have bought have failed within the first month of use and needed to be RMA'ed.  I used to think drive failure was very rare but not any more.  I am not sure if this is a reduction in quality or just the state of the current technology.  I think unRAID makes one more aware of this as you get made aware when there are disk problems while other types of systems might ignore them.  I know a lot of people now talk about running the pre-clear script for about a week to try and reduce the chance of this early life failure affecting your unRAID system.

Having the drive fail in unraid then also fail a sector scan in another computer pretty much puts this question to bed. Its too bad really. The drive is only a couple weeks old.

In my recent experience about 20% of drives I have bought have failed within the first month of use and needed to be RMA'ed.  I used to think drive failure was very rare but not any more.  I am not sure if this is a reduction in quality or just the state of the current technology.  I think unRAID makes one more aware of this as you get made aware when there are disk problems while other types of systems might ignore them.  I know a lot of people now talk about running the pre-clear script for about a week to try and reduce the chance of this early life failure affecting your unRAID system.

 

I've had such good luck with drives and unraid I never rarely run into hard drive problems. Its an area I'm not familiar with really. I re-ran the sector check again just to confirm my OCD and the drive indeed has several damaged sectors. That of course would not be a good drive to use as a parity drive. I'm running my array unprotected now until I do receive the replacement drive. I'll try to take the recommendation of buying a spare drive. Even though $300 isn't a huge amount of money it is hard to have it just sit around, and most of my array is filled with movies/music that can be replaced over time.

Having the drive fail in unraid then also fail a sector scan in another computer pretty much puts this question to bed. Its too bad really. The drive is only a couple weeks old.

In my recent experience about 20% of drives I have bought have failed within the first month of use and needed to be RMA'ed.  I used to think drive failure was very rare but not any more.  I am not sure if this is a reduction in quality or just the state of the current technology.  I think unRAID makes one more aware of this as you get made aware when there are disk problems while other types of systems might ignore them.  I know a lot of people now talk about running the pre-clear script for about a week to try and reduce the chance of this early life failure affecting your unRAID system.

 

I've had such good luck with drives and unraid I never rarely run into hard drive problems. Its an area I'm not familiar with really. I re-ran the sector check again just to confirm my OCD and the drive indeed has several damaged sectors. That of course would not be a good drive to use as a parity drive. I'm running my array unprotected now until I do receive the replacement drive. I'll try to take the recommendation of buying a spare drive. Even though $300 isn't a huge amount of money it is hard to have it just sit around, and most of my array is filled with movies/music that can be replaced over time.

That is why I used to run it as a cache drive.  Then I had a warm spare and all I would have to do would be to remove it from being a cache drive (loosing any apps that might be stored on it - didn't have any so wasn't a problem for me) and add it in place of the bad drive and rebuild.  The replacement drive would become the new cache drive after a few preclear cycles.  I wasn't ever using the cache drive as a cache drive so I removed it and it became a cold spare since I only write to the drive shares and only every few months.