Joe L. Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 Just pre-cleared a new, unused WD Caviar Black drive. Although it looks fine, the temperature has me a bit concerned. Am I interpreting it correctly... that the temperature went over 100C at some point? The interim reports I received all averaged about 35C. Maybe it has something to do with me preclearing 20 disks at once? Will post results of other drives when finished. Thanks for looking. ========================================================================1.9 == invoked as: ./preclear_disk.sh -M 4 /dev/sdi == WDC WD2001FASS-00W2B0 WD-WMAY00412287 == Disk /dev/sdi has been successfully precleared == with a starting sector of 63 == Ran 1 cycle == == Using :Read block size = 8225280 Bytes == Last Cycle's Pre Read Time : 5:37:34 (98 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Zeroing time : 4:59:27 (111 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Post Read Time : 12:23:18 (44 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Total Time : 23:01:26 == == Total Elapsed Time 23:01:26 == == Disk Start Temperature: 35C == == Current Disk Temperature: -->46<--C, == ============================================================================ ** Changed attributes in files: /tmp/smart_start_sdi /tmp/smart_finish_sdi ATTRIBUTE NEW_VAL OLD_VAL FAILURE_THRESHOLD STATUS RAW_VALUE Temperature_Celsius = 106 117 0 ok 46 You do have an issue with air-flow. The disk in this report is a bit hotter than many consider safe at 46C. Most will advise you keep disk temperatures below 40C. Joe L. Quote Link to comment
arcane Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 You do have an issue with air-flow. The disk in this report is a bit hotter than many consider safe at 46C. Most will advise you keep disk temperatures below 40C. Joe L. I noticed that. The Caviars finished at a higher temperature than the rest of the Seagate Barracudas I have been preclearing (which end up at an average of 35C). I also noticed that while temperatures were high ( >40C) during the pre-clear and post-read, they were average mid-30s in the phases between. I should also note that I'm pre-clearing 20 drives at once, and most of them are 7200 rpm. When I was doing the preclear with only 3 drives, temperatures were cooler (see a few posts back). Would this perhaps explain the temperature difference? I have replaced all fans in the 4224 running at max speed. Quote Link to comment
Superorb Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 ^^ I'm being curious here, but why are you using so many 7200rpm drives, and what PSU are you using to run all those power hungry drives? Quote Link to comment
arcane Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 ^^ I'm being curious here, but why are you using so many 7200rpm drives, and what PSU are you using to run all those power hungry drives? It's what I had available I plan to transition to WD green drives eventually (I have two 2.0 TB EADS but those took over 30 hrs to clear... typical?). And I'm running it off a Seasonic X-650. Quote Link to comment
Superorb Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 ^^ I'm being curious here, but why are you using so many 7200rpm drives, and what PSU are you using to run all those power hungry drives? It's what I had available I plan to transition to WD green drives eventually (I have two 2.0 TB EADS but those took over 30 hrs to clear... typical?). And I'm running it off a Seasonic X-650. Yes, the 30 hours is typical of a 2TB drive. At 54A on the PSU, you're pushing things running 20 drives if most of them are 7200rpm drives. Have you noticed any wonkiness yet? 54A from a 650w PSU just sounds great though. My 500w PSU cranks out 34A. Quote Link to comment
arcane Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 Yes, the 30 hours is typical of a 2TB drive. At 54A on the PSU, you're pushing things running 20 drives if most of them are 7200rpm drives. Have you noticed any wonkiness yet? 54A from a 650w PSU just sounds great though. My 500w PSU cranks out 34A. But the 2.0 TB Caviars finished about 7 hours less... but perhaps this is due to the RPM difference? I don't plan on running all 22 drives simultaneously when it's all up and running. Since unRAID spins down unused disks, the PSU should be good to go, right? You do bring up a point of concern though. If power was insufficient, would pre-clearing this many drives at once cause errors in the final report? On some of the drives, I note things near threshold like spin retries, high fly writes, etc. Quote Link to comment
Superorb Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 ^^ Power gremlins can cause all kinds of hard to diagnose problems that may present as a failing drive or something else. You must remember that when powering on the server all drives will spinup and stress the PSU. 7200rpm drives will finish before 5900rpm drives if their transfer rates are more than the 5900rpm drives. Quote Link to comment
arcane Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 ^^ Power gremlins can cause all kinds of hard to diagnose problems that may present as a failing drive or something else. You must remember that when powering on the server all drives will spinup and stress the PSU. 7200rpm drives will finish before 5900rpm drives if their transfer rates are more than the 5900rpm drives. Good point. I should probably look into upgrading... far cheaper to upgrade the PSU than buy more HDs! The 850W should be sufficient... OTOH, it's probably good that the system hasn't crashed yet especially considering I'm using a MB/CPu combo that hasn't been tested here before... Quote Link to comment
Joe L. Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 I don't plan on running all 22 drives simultaneously when it's all up and running. Since unRAID spins down unused disks, the PSU should be good to go, right? If a read error occurs, all the drives are commanded to spin up simultaneously so the block being read can be re-constructed and returned back to the program requesting it. That will require the power supply to be able to spin up all the drives at the same time. The power supply on a large server is not the place to economize. Quote Link to comment
arcane Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 If a read error occurs, all the drives are commanded to spin up simultaneously so the block being read can be re-constructed and returned back to the program requesting it. That will require the power supply to be able to spin up all the drives at the same time. The power supply on a large server is not the place to economize. There's no way I need all that storage space for the immediate future so I'll kill power to a few of those backplanes before putting it into service. However, are the preclear results now invalid because of possible power problems? Hoping you'll say no... Quote Link to comment
Joe L. Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 However, are the preclear results now invalid because of possible power problems? Hoping you'll say no... They should be fine. You were not trying to spin them all up at the same instant while preclearing. Quote Link to comment
arcane Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 They should be fine. You were not trying to spin them all up at the same instant while preclearing. Whew... I was hoping I wouldn't have to redo all 22 drives. Here are the results: http://goo.gl/Mre5p I intend to do at least two more cycles on those drives which have reallocated sectors. Are there any other drives I should be concerned about? It seems like there are a lot of the Barracudas which have many of the same types of errors, but I'm not certain which are important. Perhaps I won't try preclearing that many drives again at once, if only because of the high temperatures. I can post the full logs if needed... Thanks for helping to interpret the results... Quote Link to comment
Darqfallen Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Now it seems to prove me a liar. The telnet session updated itself and is now continuing normally. Now it is complete and I am not sure what to make of the results. ** Changed attributes in files: /tmp/smart_start_sdb /tmp/smart_finish_sdb ATTRIBUTE NEW_VAL OLD_VAL FAILURE_THRESHOLD STATUS RAW_VALUE Raw_Read_Error_Rate = 115 118 6 ok 84865055 Spin_Retry_Count = 100 100 97 near_thresh 0 End-to-End_Error = 100 100 99 near_thresh 0 Reported_Uncorrect = 23 57 0 near_thresh 77 High_Fly_Writes = 95 96 0 ok 5 Airflow_Temperature_Cel = 78 80 45 ok 22 Temperature_Celsius = 22 20 0 near_thresh 22 Hardware_ECC_Recovered = 43 41 0 ok 84865055 Current_Pending_Sector = 100 99 0 ok 0 Offline_Uncorrectable = 100 99 0 ok 0 No SMART attributes are FAILING_NOW 52 sectors were pending re-allocation before the start of the preclear. 50 sectors were pending re-allocation after pre-read in cycle 1 of 1. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 1 of 1. 0 sectors are pending re-allocation at the end of the preclear, a change of -52 in the number of sectors pending re-allocation. 607 sectors had been re-allocated before the start of the preclear. 607 sectors are re-allocated at the end of the preclear, the number of sectors re-allocated did not change. Quote Link to comment
Joe L. Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Now it seems to prove me a liar. The telnet session updated itself and is now continuing normally. Now it is complete and I am not sure what to make of the results. ** Changed attributes in files: /tmp/smart_start_sdb /tmp/smart_finish_sdb ATTRIBUTE NEW_VAL OLD_VAL FAILURE_THRESHOLD STATUS RAW_VALUE Raw_Read_Error_Rate = 115 118 6 ok 84865055 Spin_Retry_Count = 100 100 97 near_thresh 0 End-to-End_Error = 100 100 99 near_thresh 0 Reported_Uncorrect = 23 57 0 near_thresh 77 High_Fly_Writes = 95 96 0 ok 5 Airflow_Temperature_Cel = 78 80 45 ok 22 Temperature_Celsius = 22 20 0 near_thresh 22 Hardware_ECC_Recovered = 43 41 0 ok 84865055 Current_Pending_Sector = 100 99 0 ok 0 Offline_Uncorrectable = 100 99 0 ok 0 No SMART attributes are FAILING_NOW 52 sectors were pending re-allocation before the start of the preclear. 50 sectors were pending re-allocation after pre-read in cycle 1 of 1. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 1 of 1. 0 sectors are pending re-allocation at the end of the preclear, a change of -52 in the number of sectors pending re-allocation. 607 sectors had been re-allocated before the start of the preclear. 607 sectors are re-allocated at the end of the preclear, the number of sectors re-allocated did not change. Before you started the pre-clear, there were 607 sectors that had been re-allocated. Typically that many would have people RMA the drive, even if it had not yet failed the SMART threshold. Before you started the pre-clear, there were 52 additional sectors pending re-allocation. During the zeroing of the drive, those 52 apparently were able to be re-written in pace rather than re-allocated, as the number of re-allocated sectors did not change. I'd run another pre-clear cycle. If nothing changes, use the drive but keep an eye on it. Or, RMA it... it is on its way to failing with over 600 sectors re-allocated. Quote Link to comment
mbryanr Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Looks like you had a drive with previous errors (607 sectors reallocated, 52 sectors pending re-allocation) Those 52 sectors pending re-allocation were successfully rewritten after zeroing the disk. Raw Value = 0 Looks like a Samsung drive. If I guessed I'd say a HD154UI? Anyways, the Reported_Uncorrect were (read) errors that could not be corrected with ECC (lower number better) Although "OK" - I would run another preclear cycle. Quote Link to comment
Darqfallen Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Seagate Drive. I am going to pick up a new drive to use and RMA this one. Thanks. Quote Link to comment
artagnan Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 Here are the results of my last 2 Samsung HD204UI: preclear_finish_sdb_2011-05-15.txt preclear_finish_sdc_2011-05-15.txt preclear_rpt_sdb_2011-05-15.txt preclear_rpt_sdc_2011-05-15.txt Quote Link to comment
Superorb Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 Here are the results of my last 2 Samsung HD204UI: How do you get those logs to be readable? The logs in my preclear folder are all without extensions, and when I open them in notepad it's a garbled mess. I know it's something small that I'm doing wrong. Quote Link to comment
artagnan Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 I open them with "Notepad++" and then save them as txt. Quote Link to comment
Superorb Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 I open them with "Notepad++" and then save them as txt. Thanks, I'll look for that. Quote Link to comment
artagnan Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Please, Joe, take a quick look of my last 2 precleared HDDs. Thanks in advance Quote Link to comment
Joe L. Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Please, Joe, take a quick look of my last 2 precleared HDDs. Thanks in advance Unless the output report says they failed, or have re-allocated sectors, or sectors pending re-allocation, there is really nothing to look at. Enjoy your new drives. Joe L. Quote Link to comment
KYThrill Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I have used preclear 1.11 to clear two drives now. On both, it hasn't showed any preclear status on MyMain. Is there some configuration that I'm missing, or should it automatically get displayed in MyMain? Quote Link to comment
Joe L. Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I have used preclear 1.11 to clear two drives now. On both, it hasn't showed any preclear status on MyMain. Is there some configuration that I'm missing, or should it automatically get displayed in MyMain? Did you update unmenu to use the new MyMain? It should show: 07-unmenu-mymain.awk: 1.53 - changes for myMain 3-10-11 release, contributed by bjp999 - 5.0b6 support - Revision: 223 when you click on the "about" link. If you did, there is already one other person reporting it is not displaying their disk's pre-clear status. Might be the same bug. Joe L. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.