From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <13426df10712252231u167ae5c2k616534728b97e338@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 01:31:35 -0500
From: "ron minnich" <rminnich@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] ata drive capabilities
In-Reply-To: <9bd860fd77b8e6e4bf4d87d7ba44e5ed@quanstro.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20071225214010.GD16180@hermes.my.domain>
	<9bd860fd77b8e6e4bf4d87d7ba44e5ed@quanstro.net>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 220937b2-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Dec 25, 2007 6:59 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>(we have a drive
> in the lab that smart declares will fail any minute now.  it's been
> this way for 2 years.)

>>From everything I've seen, SMART has zero correlation with real
hardware issues -- confirmed by a discussion with someone at a big
search company. SMART is dumb.



> this can be a big problem if you have a
> machine with raid that won't boot due to a drive failure.
> (why have a raid if one failure means an unbootable machine?)

it makes great ad copy.

ron