Subject: Re: Bad sectors vs RAIDframe
To: Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
From: Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
List: netbsd-users
Date: 05/10/2005 23:08:13
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 11:57:14AM -0400, Charles Swiger wrote:
> On May 4, 2005, at 11:20 AM, Stephen Borrill wrote:
> >Got a RAID 1 set of identical Maxtor 6Y080M0 80GB S-ATA drives. One 
> >seems to have developed a bad sector or two:
> >
> >wd2a: error reading fsbn 845648 of 845648-845663 (wd2 bn 847664; cn 
> >840 tn 14 sn 62)wd2: (uncorrectable data error)
> >[ ... ]
> >Is there any way to mark bad sectors in the underlying components so 
> >that RAIDframe will ignore them? Is doing such a thing a sensible 
> >move? bad144/badsect don't seem appropriate.
> 
> No, it's not a sensible move.  Modern ATA drives already use ECC and 
> migrate bad sectors to the spare sectors automaticly.  You don't see 
> errors until the drive has had so many bad sectors appear that it has 
> used up all of the replacement spare sectors.

It may also that the drive couldn't correct the error. In such a case, the
sector will be remapped on write.
Just rebuilding the array (raidctl -R) would take care of this. I did
this a few times with success on some raid1 set.

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--