On Tuesday 02 March 2010 13:35:23 J.C. Roberts wrote: > On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:06:46 -0500 [email protected] wrote: > > Quoting "J.C. Roberts" <[email protected]>: > > > And I thought I was expected to be inconsistent. ;) > > > > > > Anyhow, I was upgrading from the Feb 2, to the most recent > > > snapshot, and fsck is coming up with a problem on one of my > > > partitions. I can probably get it working ("fix" is such a strong > > > word) with `fsck -fy` but my real concern is if the drive is > > > failing? > > > > > > atactl tells me everything is just fine? > > > > > > I have a nearly identical system, with the same type of disk, which > > > reports similar atactl attributes... but then again, I don't really > > > trust SATA/PATA drives very much or their supposedly "smart" > > > monitoring. > > > > > > The data on the system is not only backed up, but it's also easily > > > replaced since the machine is only used for src and ports builds. I > > > think I might lose a total of a few newly downloaded distfiles > > > since the last backup. > > > > > > What I really want to do here is understand *why* some portion of > > > the disk has become unreadable? > > > > I've seen the smart system report errors and have had them become > > true a few times, but far more often I've seen the damn things report > > "No proble, Boss" and then died a little later... > > > > You could have any number of things going on giving you those read > > errors. With the right test jig from the manufacturer you'd likely > > know. My guess would be an op amp for one of the heads isn't quite > > working right. The other possibility is that part of the disk wasn't > > coated right and you have a weak spot, magnetically speaking. > > > > But you'll never really know. At least you now have a new target, for > > practice with. Sabot rounds are great for little disks... > > Where's Nick and his nail gun when we need him? > > I got to work with some people from the "disk industry" and know how > secretive they must be about how stuff actually works due to NDA's. I'd > have better odds as a snowball in hell than getting the needed test > equipment and docs from the vendor.
Very likely true, which I why I say that you have an interesting target! --STeve Andre'
