[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: ZFS RAIDZ2 and wd uncorrectable data error - why does ZFS not notice the hardware error?
On Sun, 18 Jul 2021 at 00:30, Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
> Ah, interesting point. I find this confusing, because I thought an
> uncorrectable read error would, for disks I've dealt with, cause the
> sector to be marked as permanently failed and pending reallocation.
It depends where the failure occurs I expect. A drive could read just
fine, but then a damaged cable may cause enough noise that the data
doesn't always make it to the controller correctly.
> I also didn't realize that wd(4) would issue aother read when there is a
> failure, but maybe that's in zfs glue code.
wd has retried for years I think, it certanly used to do that with the
soft RAID code.
Looks to be set at 5 in the source, if I'm looking in the right place. :D
I expect if you just use wd devices for ZFS there may be some merit in
setting the retries to 1 and letting ZFS deal with it, it'd stop the
slow I/O, with the effect of ZFS failing the drive.
> >> 5 200 140 yes online positive Reallocated sector count 0
> > I was expecting to see this value greater than 0 if the drive was
> > failing, is the drive bad or the cabling?
> Sectors get marked as failed, and then they actually get reallocated
> when you write.
> I bet after a dd of /dev/zero that will go up.
This is useful to know!. :)
Main Index |
Thread Index |