mikebuzz

I believe the latter is the case, just from experiments I've done over the last couple of hours. That might explain the continually-increasing count you are seeing from your testing.

Note that it is not unusual to have a few (< 10) such "slow sectors" on a drive. Personally, I don't like to see more than 10 on a new drive, especially if there are several in close proximity. Sometimes, a re-writing of the drive (or affected area) will improve the situation--the problematic sectors resulted from a "weak" writing.

Good luck (and thanks again for the enlightenment),
UhClem

Hi Mike,
Firstly, thanks for making me aware of the fact that many hard drives maintain a counter of "ReadRecovery Attempts". I wrote a low-level program to detect read-retries and log the location and duration; I've used this to check out all new drives I've bought over the last 5 years.

In my opinion, you should have that drive replaced, either from the retailer (since it appears to be new ), or from Toshiba. Although it is not a "Bad" drive, it is not "Good" either. Consider: ... just because you, or I, are not "Sick", does not imply we are "Healthy"--there's a lot of in-between.

While it is not clear from the description of the Read_Recovery_Attempts whether it is a count of the number of actual sectors exhibiting the behavior, or the number of occurrences of the behavior itself. I.e., repeated readings of a dysfunctional sector might account for multiple R_R_As.