On Monday 01 December 2003 01:32, Bruce Allen wrote:
> > Well, that may be OK but after I ran a couple of tests
> > with smartctl and badblocks utility, things changed
> > dramatically and this troubles me... Seems I need to
> > ask for another drive...
> The drive itself may be "OK" BUT you have a number of
> unreadable sectors:
> 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0032 083 081 000
> Old_age Always - 17
> 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 081 081 000
> Old_age Offline - 19
> You can run the IBM/Hitachi drive fitness utility to
> force these to reallocate, but data will be lost unless
> the drive suceeeds in reading those sectors.
The problem is that badblocks utility has found 29 bad
blocks and these are stright in two rows 57242-57253 and
57398-57406, and then some more: 57478, 57550, 57622,
57694, 57766, 57767, 57838, 57839 (block size is 4096
bytes, i.e. 8 sectors). Those which are in two rows, I
think, can not be reallocated, so they only can be excluded
from operation by 'e2fsck -c'. Also it looks like a damaged
track, though I'm not sure, of course. What do you think?
I tried to find files which use these blocks on the
filesystem but I don't know how to do this. dumpe2fs shows
that these blocks belong to 1st group:
Group 1: (Blocks 32768-65535)
Backup Superblock at 32768, Group Descriptors at
Block bitmap at 32770 (+2), Inode bitmap at 32771 (+3)
Inode table at 32772-33282 (+4)
0 free blocks, 13597 free inodes, 326 directories
Free inodes: 19108-32704
So blocks seem to be in use. However, what is interesting is
find / -mount -type f -print0 |
tar -T- --null -cvPf - > /dev/null 2> fscheck.last
do not show any error! I have no idea to explain this.
May I ask you two questions? How many bad sectors on a disk
are still acceptable? And is there any utility which can
provide more information on the ext2/3 filesystem and look
for files by block number?
Also, could you please look again at the smartctl output
(attached) and give me some advice?