RAID card alarm goes off overnight - new Seagate drive dying already?

Discussion in 'SSDs & Data Storage' started by crystalline, Mar 3, 2007.

  1. crystalline

    crystalline [H]Lite

    Messages:
    84
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    In the middle of the night last night, an alarm starts blaring from my case and wakes me up. yeah, 9am IS the middle of the night, when you go to sleep at 5, lol. I'm startled/terrified/confused, the last thing I wanted to do is troubleshoot this piece of crap, and I desperately wanted to return to sleep, so I just shut it down (properly, through windows) and decide to forget about it in the morning.

    Turns out that the incident happened in the middle of a scheduled virus scan, and it generated a load of errors in Administrative tools -> Event Viewer. The cause was either one of my drives, or the RAID card itself, somehow losing its connection to the drive. Drive failure seems more likely, but this drive is new, and has only been in use for about 2 weeks. Why would Seagate give 5 year warranties on drives that die in less than a month...

    The drive is a 500gb Seagate ST3500630AS (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822148136)

    RAID card is HighPoint RocketRAID 2300 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16816115029)

    This is the message shown in the "HighPoint RAID Management Console":

    From Administrative Tools -> Event Viewer, a bunch of error incidents are reported. Event IDs: 9, 12, 15, 51, 57. Error 15 is given 11 times, error 51 twice, the rest once:

    There were 4 of the application popup windows, listing 4 different folders ("Delayed Write Failed: Windows was unable to save all the data for the file M:\.... The data has been lost"), but weirdly enough, I'm now able to access all of the folders that were listed in the errors, even though "the data has been lost".

    This is the report from Speedfan:

    [​IMG]


    The errors here seem troubling... I've run a few Western Digitals through the Speedfan utility, drives that had been used for 3+ years, and they were rated 100% across the board except for power-on hours.

    Are these results typical of Seagate drives?

    Should I ignore this incident, or RMA this drive?

    Any other diagnostics I should try first?

    thanks for any help...
     
  2. DBZ33

    DBZ33 Gawd

    Messages:
    797
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    It could be the way Newegg ships there hard drives. I had 2 of my 5 raid 5 Maxtor Maxline III hard drives fail in the first week. After sending them back to Maxtor I never had another problem. If you see the way Maxtor ships its drives and see the way Newegg ships there drives you will understand why. Im sure the Seagates are fine.

    One other thing that can be a problem is the Power Supply. Make sure you have a good one. Good Luck.
     
  3. Grentz

    Grentz [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,104
    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Seagate are, in my experience at least, some of the best drives there are.

    I have had much better luck with Seagate vs. WD and others.

    But there are always going to be bad ones in batches, just RMA the drive. Seagate is awesome for RMAs and you will get it shipped to packed very well as DB stated (Maxtor is owned by Seagate BTW).
     
  4. BillParrish

    BillParrish [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,520
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Its probally nothing, the ES series is designed for raids, yours is not an ES, and one of the things about the ES series that is making a little bell go off somewhere in my head is something about the amount of time the drive takes to report something like "I am busy. go away for a while" i dont remember the details.

    rest of it is a chain reaction.


    What I am thinking is your virus scan had the drive so busy that when the OS wanted to write a page file or something like that, the drive reported itself as busy too quickly or not quick enough or the planets were not in proper alignment, and the controller card freaked out thinking the drive was gone when it was just very busy.

    Your SMART info looks good so I dont think its a drive failure. I think its a timing thing. I am pretty sure about that.

    Hopefully a super raid guru will come along and comment. I might be full of crap but I swear I have seen this before somewhere and its not a huge deal.

    it does show why the extra $10 for the ES's are worth it :p


    If possible you might try lowering the priority of your virus scanner, might be hidden somewhere in its options.
     
  5. drizzt81

    drizzt81 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,361
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    According to the SR drive reliability survey the 7200.9 is in the 19 percentile (better than 19% of the models in the DB) while the 7200.7 is in the 89 percentile. I am not sure if we can say with certainty that Seagate drives are better than others in general.
     
  6. crystalline

    crystalline [H]Lite

    Messages:
    84
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    the drive in question is actually a 7200.10... i had considered going with the ES series, but at the time the price spread was much higher on newegg in november when i ordered. as i remember, the 7200.9's were around $160, 7200.10's were $200, and ES series were like $250.

    btw, the drive is not currently running in an actual RAID config, right now the raid card is just being used for the additional sata ports...

    what makes you say that the SMART info looks good? compared to the WD raptors and a few older IDE western digitals i've tested on the same system, which all display 100% perfect ratings for all attributes, this drive shows significant occurances of "raw read error rate", "seek error rate", and "hardware ecc recovered"... are these kinds of results typical for seagate drives? why the difference between them and western digital in SMART readings?
     
  7. BillParrish

    BillParrish [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,520
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    I say the SMART data looks good as in there is not any impendending failure indicated, which was the basis for your thread titile.

    I have no way of knowing how long and under what conditions those other drives were in service, SMART data is cummulative.

    Replace it if you want, I was not and am not interested in a discussion of "whos drive is best" . I still think its a timing issue between the raid card and the drive.

    here:

    from
    http://www.techworld.com/storage/features/index.cfm?featureid=1019

    seach on "raid timeout"

    Or replace it, I dont give a crap.