Thread: Storing eBooks.
View Single Post
Old 12-25-2022, 05:29 PM   #22
j.p.s
Grand Sorcerer
j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 5,837
Karma: 105490889
Join Date: Apr 2011
Device: pb360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quoth View Post
I've spun up drives unused for 25 years. Less likely than fade on Flash/SSD, especially higher 3D levels. On Sata there is usually SMART. Any important back up should be on known good media and read to check.
It's loads of on/off cycles that can cause failure to spin up.
Google has a 13 page paper Failure Trends in a Large Disk Drive Population (easy to find with a web search. Among the conclusions:
Quote:
Our results confirm the findings of previous smaller
population studies that suggest that some of the SMART
parameters are well-correlated with higher failure prob-
abilities. We find, for example, that after their first scan
error, drives are 39 times more likely to fail within 60
days than drives with no such errors. First errors in re-
allocations, offline reallocations, and probational counts
are also strongly correlated to higher failure probabil-
ities. Despite those strong correlations, we find that
failure prediction models based on SMART parameters
alone are likely to be severely limited in their prediction
accuracy, given that a large fraction of our failed drives
have shown no SMART error signals whatsoever.
(Emphasis mine.)
j.p.s is offline   Reply With Quote