Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > How to prolong HDD life?

Reply
Thread Tools

How to prolong HDD life?

 
 
Mark Robinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-29-2007
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:43:24 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>>> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>>>> My last drive, a 20.5GB Quantum Fireball was hotter, noisier, and
>>>> according to SMART, was down to 79% fitness when I moved it on.
>>> You bother with SMART? I just use drives until they either develop bad
>>> sectors or die.

>> Well, after losing a couple, I would rather get advance notice.

>
> But the SMART readings don't seem to correlate to real life.


True, smartmontools under linux does seem to have a bit of a problem there.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Nighthawk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-29-2007
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 22:52:23 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:

>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:43:24 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>>
>>>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>>>
>>>> My last drive, a 20.5GB Quantum Fireball was hotter, noisier, and
>>>> according to SMART, was down to 79% fitness when I moved it on.
>>>
>>>You bother with SMART? I just use drives until they either develop bad
>>>sectors or die.

>>
>> Well, after losing a couple, I would rather get advance notice.

>
>But the SMART readings don't seem to correlate to real life.


It seems that some do and some don't.

http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...uresSMART.html

I have had the chip on the logic burnout failure, no warning. I had
an el cheapo PSU at the time, which might contribute to that.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-29-2007
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 22:52:23 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>
>>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:43:24 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My last drive, a 20.5GB Quantum Fireball was hotter, noisier, and
>>>>> according to SMART, was down to 79% fitness when I moved it on.
>>>>
>>>>You bother with SMART? I just use drives until they either develop bad
>>>>sectors or die.
>>>
>>> Well, after losing a couple, I would rather get advance notice.

>>
>>But the SMART readings don't seem to correlate to real life.

>
> It seems that some do and some don't.


There were a couple of large studies of hard-drive failures published
earlier this year. Both of them showed very little relevance of SMART
readings to actual failure modes.

My conclusion is: don't bother monitoring SMART readings. That time is
better spent ensuring your backups are up to date.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeeCee
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-30-2007
"Nighthawk" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> After a slight gliche today I decided to check the SMART state of my
> hard drive. My 160GB Samsung SP1614N has been very good and fitness
> and performance always came up at 100% but today I found performance
> down to 98% and fitness down to 97%. I used the online analysis on
> the SMART tab in SpeedFan and it indicated the area of concern was the
> power-on hours. I had been using it 24/7, with P2P. With P2P running
> constantly the drive never went into sleep mode. With the recent
> demise of the fixed IP servers on the eDonkey network I have decided
> to discontinue with P2P.
>
> What I was wondering was, which is better: turning off the computer or
> letting the drive go into sleep mode, or keeping it running
> continually, though there is no disc activity? Which would actually
> be more strenuous on it?
>
> I gather powering up or spinning up a drive is stressful for it?
>
>



You may find this pdf from Google Research on hard drive reliability
interesting:
http://research.google.com/archive/disk_failures.pdf

The sample base is of over 100,000 consumer grade drives from all
manufacturers.

During a quick browse thru the following points were noted:

'Smart' does not necessarily predict HD failure.
Temperature is not the HD killer popular opinion suggests.
Failure rates jump at the 2 year rate.

Or put another way the life time of your particular Hard Drive is mainly
down to Luck.

My own experience has been similar.There was a certain 20GB series of HD's
made around 2001-2002 that all crapped out after 12-18 months due to a chip
failure on the electronics board.
But other than that all the other drive brand/models I've used, installed or
sold have had lifetimes ranging from a couple of hours to 20 years or more.


Best
Paul.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Enkidu
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-30-2007
Mark Robinson wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:43:24 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>>>> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> My last drive, a 20.5GB Quantum Fireball was hotter, noisier, and
>>>>> according to SMART, was down to 79% fitness when I moved it on.
>>>> You bother with SMART? I just use drives until they either develop bad
>>>> sectors or die.
>>> Well, after losing a couple, I would rather get advance notice.

>>
>> But the SMART readings don't seem to correlate to real life.

>
> True, smartmontools under linux does seem to have a bit of a problem there.
>

So does Windows. Disks which are 'about to fail' go on for years, and
disk which throw no error messages fail without warning.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or
'hilarious', it usually isn't?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Squiggle
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-30-2007
PeeCee wrote:
> "Nighthawk" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> After a slight gliche today I decided to check the SMART state of my
>> hard drive. My 160GB Samsung SP1614N has been very good and fitness
>> and performance always came up at 100% but today I found performance
>> down to 98% and fitness down to 97%. I used the online analysis on
>> the SMART tab in SpeedFan and it indicated the area of concern was the
>> power-on hours. I had been using it 24/7, with P2P. With P2P running
>> constantly the drive never went into sleep mode. With the recent
>> demise of the fixed IP servers on the eDonkey network I have decided
>> to discontinue with P2P.
>>
>> What I was wondering was, which is better: turning off the computer or
>> letting the drive go into sleep mode, or keeping it running
>> continually, though there is no disc activity? Which would actually
>> be more strenuous on it?
>>
>> I gather powering up or spinning up a drive is stressful for it?
>>
>>

>
>
> You may find this pdf from Google Research on hard drive reliability
> interesting:
> http://research.google.com/archive/disk_failures.pdf
>
> The sample base is of over 100,000 consumer grade drives from all
> manufacturers.
>
> During a quick browse thru the following points were noted:
>
> 'Smart' does not necessarily predict HD failure.
> Temperature is not the HD killer popular opinion suggests.
> Failure rates jump at the 2 year rate.
>
> Or put another way the life time of your particular Hard Drive is mainly
> down to Luck.
>
> My own experience has been similar.There was a certain 20GB series of
> HD's made around 2001-2002 that all crapped out after 12-18 months due
> to a chip failure on the electronics board.
> But other than that all the other drive brand/models I've used,
> installed or sold have had lifetimes ranging from a couple of hours to
> 20 years or more.
>
>
> Best
> Paul.
>


But how relevant to a desktop user is that study? All those drives were
more or less on 24/7 for there entire life, so most of them had probably
only ever been spun up a dozen or so times in total.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Gordon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-30-2007
On 2007-09-30, Enkidu <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Mark Robinson wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:43:24 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>>> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>>>>> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> My last drive, a 20.5GB Quantum Fireball was hotter, noisier, and
>>>>>> according to SMART, was down to 79% fitness when I moved it on.
>>>>> You bother with SMART? I just use drives until they either develop bad
>>>>> sectors or die.
>>>> Well, after losing a couple, I would rather get advance notice.
>>>
>>> But the SMART readings don't seem to correlate to real life.

>>
>> True, smartmontools under linux does seem to have a bit of a problem there.
> >

> So does Windows. Disks which are 'about to fail' go on for years, and
> disk which throw no error messages fail without warning.
>

Any mechanical devices tends to do this.

As another poster has said backups win every time
 
Reply With Quote
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-30-2007
Nighthawk wrote:
> After a slight gliche today I decided to check the SMART state of my
> hard drive. My 160GB Samsung SP1614N has been very good and fitness
> and performance always came up at 100% but today I found performance
> down to 98% and fitness down to 97%. I used the online analysis on
> the SMART tab in SpeedFan and it indicated the area of concern was the
> power-on hours. I had been using it 24/7, with P2P. With P2P running
> constantly the drive never went into sleep mode. With the recent
> demise of the fixed IP servers on the eDonkey network I have decided
> to discontinue with P2P.
>
> What I was wondering was, which is better: turning off the computer or
> letting the drive go into sleep mode, or keeping it running
> continually, though there is no disc activity? Which would actually
> be more strenuous on it?
>
> I gather powering up or spinning up a drive is stressful for it?
>
>


Yes, and no, depends on the frequency of the stops and starts....

If you have old scsi drives, like 9 and 18gig, never stop them for
long....they really do have a tendency to not restart (minutes OK, days
no)....I have not seen IDEs suffer the same way but thats usually
because they have already died and I dont have as many compared to scsi....

What you are trying to do is run a retail disk like an enterprise disk,
24/7, they have different standards....in which case you need to be
careful and aware of the reliability issues....I have done that a few
times and have found the IDE's die within 3 years.....

So, personally I look for at least 3, preferably 5 year warrantees on
disks. If I recall the Samsung's only come with two....that would be
enough for me to shop elsewhere.....

If your data is a concern and your machine has raid you could buy a new
disk and run raid 1. DSE (and I am sure others) have cheap $50 PCI raid
controllers with PATA and SATA on board....if yours does not. and YES I
know they are cheap and nasty, but $50 v $500 for performance I dont
need....$50 wins.

regards

Thing















 
Reply With Quote
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-30-2007
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 22:52:23 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:43:24 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>>> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nighthawk
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> My last drive, a 20.5GB Quantum Fireball was hotter, noisier, and
>>>>>> according to SMART, was down to 79% fitness when I moved it on.
>>>>> You bother with SMART? I just use drives until they either develop bad
>>>>> sectors or die.
>>>> Well, after losing a couple, I would rather get advance notice.
>>> But the SMART readings don't seem to correlate to real life.

>> It seems that some do and some don't.

>
> There were a couple of large studies of hard-drive failures published
> earlier this year. Both of them showed very little relevance of SMART
> readings to actual failure modes.
>
> My conclusion is: don't bother monitoring SMART readings. That time is
> better spent ensuring your backups are up to date.


yep....smart is over rated IMHO...raid 1 it and back it up.....have a
nice day....

regards

Thing








 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-01-2007
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, thingy wrote:

> What you are trying to do is run a retail disk like an enterprise disk,
> 24/7, they have different standards....


Those hard drive studies previously mentioned found no significant
difference in reliability between "enterprise" and "retail" hard drives.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: How include a large array? Edward A. Falk C Programming 1 04-04-2013 08:07 PM
How to prolong Firefox's dns search time? Hari Hari Mau Computer Support 2 03-08-2009 08:45 AM
my laptop sata hdd crahed,can i use seagate portable hdd as laptopsata hdd through some convertors?? ashjas Computer Support 2 03-29-2008 07:24 PM
Re: Win98 HDD can't see Win XP HDD Garnett Honeyson-Gandlechon Computer Support 3 08-05-2004 11:21 AM
Copying WinXP From one HDD to anther HDD jackman5 Computer Support 3 05-16-2004 04:44 PM



Advertisments