Reallocated sectors count : 524296 ? physical failure?

[rick]

Should I just RMA this disk or try to fill it with "00" to erase it?Is it likely to have severe physical problems or just some "soft" error?
Thanks for advices.


mhdd smart log
Att # 1 : Read error rate : 100 100 180064
Att # 2 : Throughput performance : 100 100 56098816
Att # 3 : Spin up time : 100 100 1
Att # 4 : Number of spin-up times : 99 99 1340
Att # 5 : Reallocated sectors count : 100 100 524296
Att # 7 : Seek error rate : 100 100 3410
Att # 8 : Seek time performance : 100 100 0
Att # 9 : Power-on time : 94 94 3457
Att # 10 : Spin-up retries : 100 100 0
Att # 12 : Start/stop count : 100 100 1094
Att # 192 : Power-off retract count : 100 100 55
Att # 193 : Load/unload cycle count : 100 100 19291
Att # 194 : HDA Temperature : 100 100 39
Att # 195 : Hardware ECC recovered : 100 100 690
Att # 196 : Reallocate event count : 100 100 451936264
Att # 197 : Current pending sectors : 94 91 7
Att # 198 : Offline scan UNC sectors : 81 81 39
Att # 199 : Ultra ATA CRC Error Rate : 200 253 0
Att # 200 : Write error rate : 100 100 5524

[coffeebean]

RMA it. Soft errors - what's that?

If I think I know what you thinking - "soft errors" - these are mostly manifestation of hard errors.

[rick]

By "soft" I mean it can be recovered by filling 00 while "hard" means fatal & physical error that can't be recovered.
Sorry for the confusion.

[rick]

http://hddguru.com/software/2005.10.02-MHDD/mhdd_manual.en.html#scanning

Actually "soft" is refered to this:
Then you have to run ERASE command which erases every sector on your drive, and drive recalculates ECC fields of each sector. This helps to get rid of «software bad blocks».

If this disk could be saved I would do it,because the RMA procedure is annoying.

[Clusterox]

Erasing is not going to help in this case. Probably, a head is falling. You better RMA it.

[rick]

Thanks for that.
RMA count +1.
Oh,I hate dealing with those customer service guys..

[BlackST]

What disk is ? (brand/model)

[rick]

FUJITSU MHZ2320BH G2


Wikipedia:
198 C6 Uncorrectable Sector Count

The total number of uncorrectable errors when reading/writing a sector. A rise in the value of this attribute indicates defects of the disk surface and/or problems in the mechanical subsystem. (or Off-Line Scan Uncorrectable Sector Count: Fujitsu)[14]

[rick]

Since everyone votes for RMA,I guess I have to do it soon..
any different idea?

[drc]

Att # 5 : Reallocated sectors count : 100 100 524296
Att # 196 : Reallocate event count : 100 100 451936264

These values are being misinterpreted.

Att # 197 : Current pending sectors : 94 91 7
Att # 198 : Offline scan UNC sectors : 81 81 39

You do have some bad sectors, but it is not nearly that many.

[Clusterox]

More precisely:

Att # 5 : Reallocated sectors count : 100 100 524296

That doesn't sound good. Isn't it looking something more than a mere handful of bad sectors drccsc? I am kinda smelling a corrupted G-list or Smart module. I have yet to see a drive - A WORKING DRIVE with half a million baders.

In any case, it's beyond the end user's capability. So I suggested for RMA (if luckily it's still under warranty) at the very first place.

[rick]

What does this mean?SMART reports wrong info?
And the real value is?


Current pending sectors just rises to 8 while Offline scan UNC sectors to 42.

[drc]

More precisely:

Att # 5 : Reallocated sectors count : 100 100 524296

That doesn't sound good. Isn't it looking something more than a mere handful of bad sectors drccsc?

No, Fujitsu drives report some of their attributes differently. You'll notice that the overall score for the attribute is still 100, whereas if there were truly 500000+ reallocated sectors (I doubt it is even possible) the attribute value not still be maxed out. If you're really interested, someone did an analysis on this some time ago, you could probably try searching "fujitsu smart" to find the thread.

[rick]

http://forum.hddguru.com/confirming-bad-heads-fujitsu-mhv2040ah-t14929.html
This one?

But even in hexadecimal the values are still strange.



Could you interpreter it into correct value?I think I lack knowledge on this..thank you.

[rick]

If the value was incorrect,should I still RMA it?

[drc]

Well, suffice to say that you DO have bad sectors, even if it isn't a huge number. IMO any bad sectors = RMA.

[fzabkar]

But even in hexadecimal the values are still strange.

Could you interpreter it into correct value?

524296 = 0x80008

That's 8 reallocated sectors.

451936264 = 0x1AF00008

That's 8 reallocation events.