Bug: non-existant "Bad Sectors" on HD "detected"Latest Fedora release, on Intel P4 arch, laptop.Attached is pdf of the erroneous error message.I used manufacturer's hard drive utilities, at least three of them, from various manufacturers, and they all reported healthy hard drive.
View 10 RepliesI am following a guide on how to change the boot order using a terminal on Ubuntu.
Link:[url]
At the Back Up Grub Settings part I do the " /boot/grub/menu.lst_backup " command and input my password and it gives me this:
So I hesitatingly decide to skip this part. At the Open in a Text Editor part I do the " /boot/grub/menu.lst " command in the terminal and it opens an empty file and I get a hunch...I go into /root/grub to check if the file even exists and I cannot even find the menu.Ist file anywhere.
I am guessing there may be a problem or the file is simply named differently for some reason, whats wrong or where the menu.Ist file is.
I put my two SATA hard drives in a new computer (new mb, cpu, no pci SATA adapter, built-in nVidia graphics), and I thought everything was going well. The Mythbuntu logo came up, but the bar at the bottom did not move. It eventually dropped me out to a (initramfs) prompt.
When I used the recovery mode, this is where it had problems:
[ 4.756000]ata1:SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300)
[ 5.068000]ata2:SATA link down (SSTatus 0 SControl 300)
[ 5.552000]ata3:SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300)
[ 5.864000]ata4:SATA link down (SSTatus 0 SControl 300)
[Code]....
I had a SATA PCI card in my old computer, would adding that to the new system make it work? Is there someway to update the UUID numbers (I think I have done this before).
I recently buy a Corsair F60, and F14 (and F11) said there is MANY bad sectors on my SSD. Is it a smartctl bug ? how can I confirm or infirm that ?
[root@localhost ~]# smartctl /dev/sdc -a
smartctl 5.39.1 2010-01-28 r3054 [x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu] (local build)
Copyright (C) 2002-10 by Bruce Allen, http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net
[code]....
After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk.If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute delay.
I've just added a second disk to one of my computers. It is a 500GB SATA. It is the second drive according to the BIOS. Fedora calls it /dev/sdb. So far so good. This box is running Fedora 13 final. Never any problems until the addition of the new disk. Palimpsest says that this disk has a LOT of bad sectors. This disk is a storage drive. I want to address the problem but don't know what to do first. My thought is to rsync all the data to my external 250GB disk bedore I do anything else but I'm mot sure if I should just yet. Maybe I should run some diagnostics on the drive? If so, what? How about the tools Disk Utility offers? Should I use the Smart Utilities? What other Linux tools are available and are they reliable? Maybe I should install XP on the main disk and use Windows' disk tools? If I should lose all data it wouldn't be the end of the world but I'm not sure how "in sync" the 2 storage drives actually are.
View 10 Replies View RelatedI'm currently using Fedora 12 as seen in the subject, and I'm fairly new to it, but recently I've had a problem with my HDD. The problem is bad sectors and I've read up on how they occur but not many placessearched actually explains how to deal with this. When I start up my laptop (Acer 5610z) I get a SMART error saying "predicted disk failure, please back up data and replace drive." Along those lines, so I got curious and used Disk Analyzer this roughly what it says:
Reallocated Sector Count: Failing Normalized:129
Worst:129
Threshold:140
[code]...
I have some errors on my drive and I fear it may be faulty. However there are a few things I would like to try before replacing it through the manufacture or buying a new drive of my own seeing as this is a brand new computer.
Here is my computer and drive:
Acer 5251-1513 Laptop
Toshiba MK2565GSX
Running Fedora 13...now
Here is what is going on. Tried several version of Ubuntu 10.4 (studio, 64bit, 32 bit) and was having many errors during startup and having to press F to fix. Then I lost something with Gnome and the GUI would not function, and I did not know how to replace it. Tried a few other distros but could not get them to work (mostly on my part I am sure.) Then after some forum talk, thought it might just be Ubuntu unable to handle my drive. Now on Fedora 13 and a warning comes up every time I startup. "Disk has many bad sectors"
In the disk utility under the SMART Data it has 2 of the following warnings:
5- Reallocated Sector count..with a value of 72 sectors
197 Current Pending Sector count...with a value of 35 sectors
Total Bad Sectors 108.
The next day that went up to 110
I have used Fsck several times through a live CD, but the problem persists. Trying to understand bad blocks and how to write them to a file?
I have an Acer tiny desktop using laptop components and I want to replace its small laptop hdd running Vista with a Kingston SSDNow V Series Boot Drive 30GB and install Ubuntu, since it will support TRIM. I am aware of the current issues on some new hard drives with 512 vs. 4k sector sizes and the necessity to align sectors for those drives. And I know I've seen some posts or discussion of aligning sectors for SSD's.
I'll be doing more searching for info on this, but my previous searches on the 4K sector alignment issue for the new WD hdd's on linux were confusing. Does anyone have definitive information on the necessity of aligning 4k sectors on current Linux kernels, or on whether aligning sectors is necessary for SSD's?
I have a massive ZFS array on my fileserver. Whenever a disk reports bad sectors to smartmon, I order a replacement, and I shelve the failing one.
And by "shelving the failing one", I mean that I give it a low-level format if applicable, or a destructive badblocks run to possible claim spare sectors to replace the bad ones, then use it to dump my DVDs (and lately BluRays) on, so that I can use it with my HTPC and bring it with me when going to my friends to watch movies. It's just a really easy and portable way to watch movies with XBMC. I have the stuff on pressed discs already, so I'm not dependent on their reliance, and the dying drive just gets a hospice life serving as quick-access media storage. Keeping in mind Google's reports that drives are 39x more likely to die within 60 days after their first SMART error, I'm expanding that period by the fact that these drives mostly remain on their shelves and are only plugged into the SATA bay once or twice every year.
I'm just saying this to make clear that I'm not confused about these drives dying, and I'm not looking to elongate their lives ;)
So. Sometimes these drives, after a badblocks run, simply claim fresh sectors from the spare pool, but sometimes there aren't any left, and I face the fact that there are bad sectors in my FS. That's not a problem if you use one of a set of linux filesystems, as mkfs.* often takes a badblocks list as input. But seeing as I sometimes bring a drive or two to my girlfriend's (Mac) or one of my friends (usually Windows), I've decided to use NTFS for these things. Up untill now, when a drive had unrelocatable bad sectors, I've just written data to it, re-read it, and files that were bad were put in a "BAD_SECTOR_FILES" folder on the drive.
Sure, it works, but it would be really nice to be able to just mark those sectors bad instead. It's a lot of hassle the other way around.
So I read some posts, of which most quickly switch subject to the often accurate one of "replace your drive!", and some suggest spinrite, but really, I don't see why I should pay that much money for such a trivial task.
The alternative is to use ext3, but I'd like to hear if someone knows how I can feed badblocks output to mkfs.ntfs, so that the bad blocks aren't used. Or if there are other tools (I could use Windows in a VM) that do the same. I'm confused about chkdsk, it seems the bad sectors thing is FAT only?
I have some bad sectors on the primary HD and want to move everything to a new HD. What would be the steps to do this. I have 5 running websites on the server. The HD are the same make and model. My current HD setup is
Code:
1 Linux LVM 232.65 GB 1 30370 LVM VG server1
2 Extended 243.17 MB 30371 30401
5 Linux 243.17 MB 30371 30401
I recently got a bad virus that wouldnt let me reinstall Windows so I figured I would install Ubuntu and give it a go, but now it says my hard drive has "many bad sectors" a quick Google search shows many ways to fix this in Windows, but how do I do it in Ubuntu?Easily since Im just getting the hang of things.
View 8 Replies View RelatedSince a few days all of my computers (3) running Ubuntu 9.10 report on startup that my external drive has "lots of bad sectors".I have checked this disk on Windows XP with chkdsk and with the SeaTools diagnostic tool dowloaded from Seagate. Both report no problems.Does anyone else suspect these Ubuntu "bad sector" warnings are unreliable?
View 9 Replies View Relatedhaving problems loading any OS because of bad sectors. will only load off live cd 9.10
View 1 Replies View RelatedI used to have windows xp. But recently I started having a message at startup telling me that my disk might be failing and I should run the test (which would crash and reboot th laptop). Then after a while windows wont even start. So I tried to use ubuntu netbook live from a usb and it is working fine ! I can even access all my data on the hard disk, although it is telling me that the hard disk is failing and that it has 1024 bad sectors. I have only one hard disk and one partition (120 GB). Can I just install ubuntu and somehow block the bad sectors? (I don't want windows anymore) and is there any way I could keep my old data on the hard disk without backing it up (it is not really important btw).
View 8 Replies View RelatedJust came up my mind about repairing the bad sectors using software.Does using a software really repair the bad sectors in the hard disk?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI did set up a new server (with mail, apache and lots of other stuff) and was not aware that the new harddisks of type WD10EARS-00Y5B1 were using 4KB sectors internally. The problem became visible after going live because of the lousy performance of the harddisk drives.
Present situation: openSUSE 11.2 i586, 4 GB RAM, 2x 1TB HDD
Code:
Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x000efdd0
[code]....
I already did re-partition /dev/sdb with parted-2.2 (compiled from source) and set the alignment starting with sector 64 (instead of the default 63) making sure that the sector count of every partition divides by 8. Now comes the tricky part: I must partition /dev/sda as well. I can backup everything to /dev/sdb. What is the recommended course of action here? Make sdb active and boot it? That would give me all the time I need to deal with sda. Then reverse again. Any backup of /dev/sda will be outdated soon (running system)Rescue DVD only offers parted-1.9.0
I was looking in the disk utility and my primary slave has a few bad sectors, is there a way to fix this? I have attached a screen shot.
View 4 Replies View RelatedQuestion 1. Does gparted etc. just write to the MBR? Question 2. Is this the only record of the partition table? Question 3. How do i find the sectors that the partitions occupy?
View 2 Replies View Relatedsince i've installed lucid, when booting up between the splash screen and the desktop i get lines of multiple i/0 errors. i checked disk utility and it's reporting multiple bad sectors on my hard drive
i don't think that the lucid install is the culprit but since i have no idea i was curious if anyone thinks it's related. not worried about the hard drive, i have a back up formatted and ready to go if this one goes nuclear.
I'm running a Debian homeserver, with a 3-disk (1GB each) raid 5 array using mdadm (the OS is on a separate disk).Now, smartmontools noticed some bad sectors on one of the disks, and I'm not sure what to do next (except for backup of valuable data).I found some articles on how to fix these sectors, but I'm unaware what the result on the whole array will be.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI can't seem to find any programs or applications for linux that will find bad sectors of a usb drive. I have seen plenty for Windows, but I was wondering if there are any for linux.
View 8 Replies View RelatedA hard disk occasionally fails. Standard checks like fsck and scandisk fail to report any problem. Is there other software to exercise the disk much more thoroughly so that bad sectors have no chance of being missed?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI am running Wheezy 7.9 (32 bit) and using Gnome Classic desktop. I have recently had several issues with system "crashes" and such, see some of my recent posts, and for now things seem to be working okay. As part of my attempts to "fix" the problems I looked at the hard drive using the SMART disk utility, and also ran "smartctl". The SMART utility reports that there are 3 bad sectors on the drive. When I run fsck, from a live CD, it does not report finding bad sectors. So why would fsck not find something that is reported by smartctl? Which one should I believe?
As a precaution I am now making daily backups of my /home directory and purchased a new HD just in case. Have not yet installed the new HD but at least I am prepared.
A hard disk occasionally fails. Standard checks like fsck and scandisk fail to report any problem. Is there other software to exercise the disk much more thoroughly so that bad sectors have no chance of being missed?
View 1 Replies View RelatedCan someone point out such a program?
View 5 Replies View RelatedHow would one determine the capacity in sectors or LBAs of a USB Hard Drive? If I know the USB device number, like from 'lsusb', is there someplace on the system to get other information about the drive? What I want to do is have a program go out and get this information just for the number of LBAs on the drive itself. Partition info doesn't matter for what I am doing.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI recently installed two 160Gb hdds, and use these with striped LVM technics.
now I came across /var/log/messages these lines... :-/
Feb 14 16:50:44 centos55 smartd[4826]: Device: /dev/sdf, 34 Offline uncorrectable sectors
Feb 14 16:50:44 centos55 smartd[4826]: Device: /dev/sdg, 14 Offline uncorrectable sectors
To my understanding, this means that the disk is beginning to fail, and should be replaced..
Short story..I have about 35.000 images on these disks... (shared on network, as a samba share with PCs using Picasa) I've doing backup to 2 separate USB disk, and sometimes I connect a third usb disk and transfer to this aswell. I'm worried now that "some" of my image/data might have been lost - due to the 2 lines above. (checking if something is missing, of the 35.000 images is not easy.. and I have not made any txt file with all files/names/size og the images -...I see now that I also should create such a list, and not just take backup)
How critical is this "Offline uncorrectable sectors" and how can I check/do something about it ?
My sister's laptop (toshiba satellite l550 running lucid) often runs really, really slow, even after a fresh install. Going through the gnome main menu, everything just lags by several seconds. Closing applications often takes a while, etc. I've run top and iostat to determine what the problem is and it seems to be IO-related. User processes and system processes don't take up more than a few percent, but the average load is usually over 2 even when I'm barely doing anything. Top shows that, whenever everything slows down, the 'wait' criterion is pretty high.
Now, I've also tried installing lucid to an external USB hard drive and that works fine. I'm currently running the S.M.A.R.T. diagnostic and so far I've got the attached screenshot to show. Only the criterion shown and the 'current pending sector count' are showing warnings.Any thoughts? Could the performance issue be related to the hard drive warning? I'm not planning to replace the hard drive just yet, because this laptop still has a two-year warranty.
I have a 230GB hard drive wich I don't know it's name.I have a 207GB windows vista partition and the rest of it is for linux (Ubuntu).Today I decided giving it all space to Ubuntu Linux ,but didn't want to lose all my data from the windows partition.I thought that by deleting all things except the folder with my data and leaving enough space to shrink and make enough room for another partition to put my data folder.The logic is that i could then format that partition wich previously was windows and use it all for ubuntu without losing data.After having ubuntu installed i could copy my data folder to /home and then delete the previous partition and make /home bigger.The problem is that after i freed the space,when using Gparted to shrink it says that the partition has bad sectors or the filesystem has problems and so it can't do some operations.
What could have went wrong?It told me to do chkdisk but as i deleted all the windows files and i can't boot into it anymore.I used the vista dvd to do that.I rebooted 2 times as it says and after that when trying again nothing changed.I tried to use ntfsresize with the --bad-sectors argument and also the -f argument but it's useless.At the end it says it won't do anything until the ntfs filesystem get repaired.Or it says it is too risky to continueIs there any way i could do some superforce command to resize it without losing data?Please don't tell me to put it on an external storage cause i have like 70GB of datas to save...no i don't have an external hardrive
How to scan and fix Bad Sectors on Hard Disk without damaging data?
View 5 Replies View Related