Hugo Mills wrote: > > [snip] > >> You can see all sorts of interesting things here which can easily be >> used to warn on pending failure of a drive. >> > > It's not actually a very good guide to failure. The figures I've > seen quoted from NetApp are that SMART data will only give you warning > of a pending drive failure in about 20% of cases, and that's if you > know what you're looking for (which most systems don't, as they can't > do the same level of analysis as NetApp can, to get the data). > > Hugo. > With my cynical hat on: NetApp would not exactly be an un-biased source of information seeing as they have a business to run based on selling a solution. If SMART was better I wouldn't expect them to tell you ;)
But fair enough comment, SMART is not a substitute for a proper storage solution, more just pointing out that there are already lots of metrics tracked and stored by even a dumb consumer hard drive.. and assuming NetApp are correct, 20% is better than nothing. -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --------------------------------------------------------------
