Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21
  1. #1
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    289
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts

    How Many Re-allocated sectors is too many?

    Hi All;
    I use CrystalDiskInfo to assess hard drive condition and hours, etc.
    I have noted a couple that show up with 4, 10, or maybe 25 re-allocated sectors; and one that shows 10,240 re-allocated sectors.
    So this begs the question; how many is too many?
    All these drives seem to be working fine, and showing their full rated capacity, so when do you start to worry?

    Thanks,
    rstew

  2. #2
    jwoods
    Guest
    Not a good sign...if the drive is still under warranty, I would RMA it.

  3. #3
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Forever West
    Posts
    2,078
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 259 Times in 248 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by rstew View Post
    Hi All;
    I use CrystalDiskInfo to assess hard drive condition and hours, etc.
    I have noted a couple that show up with 4, 10, or maybe 25 re-allocated sectors; and one that shows 10,240 re-allocated sectors.
    So this begs the question; how many is too many?
    All these drives seem to be working fine, and showing their full rated capacity, so when do you start to worry?

    Thanks,
    rstew
    Sometimes "too many" isn't as big an issue as seeing that number increase each time a check is done, also a big indicator the drive has serious problems..

  4. #4
    Super Moderator satrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cardiff, UK
    Posts
    4,492
    Thanks
    284
    Thanked 577 Times in 480 Posts
    HD Sentinel will give you a pretty good idea of how much danger your data is in.

    It only takes one particular sector to be re-allocated and you don't have a usable drive any more.

  5. #5
    Silver Lounger RolandJS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin metro area TX USA
    Posts
    1,735
    Thanks
    95
    Thanked 128 Times in 125 Posts
    I hope you can make restorable backups of your data folders and files - on at least one if not two external HDs.
    "Take care of thy backups and thy restores shall take care of thee." Ben Franklin revisited.
    http://collegecafe.fr.yuku.com/forum...-Technologies/

  6. #6
    WS Lounge VIP
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    8,199
    Thanks
    48
    Thanked 986 Times in 916 Posts
    One sector is too many, but modern disks will happily run until they run out of spares. As Berton says, steady numbers are OK, increasing is bad m'kay.
    The one with 10240 is probably mis-reporting, it should have been dead long ago. Time to run the manufacturers diags on that one and back it up now.

    cheers, Paul

  7. #7
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Durham UK
    Posts
    6,640
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 883 Times in 844 Posts
    I like HD Sentinel as well because it tells you if anything is wrong without having to understand what any of the values mean and it will also tell you the health of any external HDDs when you plug those in as well.

  8. #8
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    289
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
    Thanks for all the input.
    This is a surplus drive I had lying around that I recently put in as a backup drive. So it has only some backup data on it at this time.
    The re-allocated sector numbers dont seem to be changing, but I will recheck it after the next backup. Uncorrectable sector count is 240; re-allocated count 10,208 today.
    Meanwhile I downloaded SeaTools from the Seagate site and used it to check the drive.
    First I ran the SMART test, and it passed no problem.
    Then I ran the so-called short test, and it failed at 10%. Not good!
    This is a 2013 build date drive with only 18000 hrs on it, so I ran the serial and model nos on the Seagate warranty check site, and sure enough, it is out of warranty! No surprise there.
    Keep you posted on what happens after the next backup.

    rstew

  9. #9
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    289
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by satrow View Post
    HD Sentinel will give you a pretty good idea of how much danger your data is in.

    It only takes one particular sector to be re-allocated and you don't have a usable drive any more.
    Hey that is a nice drive health utility; thanks!
    I ran it and sure enough it shows the same number of re-allocated and uncorrectable sectors as CrystalDiskInfo and SeaTools.
    It also showed many data transfer errors, and suggested backing up the data immediately and frequent checking of the data log for further errors. Sound advice!
    It also showed performance as "Excellent" with a 100% bar graph; and the Health as critical with a 4% bar graph!
    And then it predicts drive failure in 4 days!!!!
    I don't just recall where this drive came from, as I have a bunch of loose drives around, but I think I am going to pull it and replace it with another real quick!

    rstew
    Last edited by rstew; 2015-11-18 at 14:34.

  10. #10
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    289
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
    Just had another thought about this drive.
    When I installed it and went to do a full format, there was a small partition (about 500 Mb as I recall; may have been an Ubuntu partition) which I tried to delete in disk manager.
    Disk manager said it could not delete the partition due to it being a foreign file system, or words to that effect. I thought OK, no big deal, and the format proceeded.
    Then when I went to do the first full backup using Drive Clone, there was an option to change the unknown partition file system to NTFS (same as the main partition), which I selected.
    Then Drive Clone did the backup to this D: drive. Disk manager now shows the drive as having only a single large primary partition, plus a 100 MB system reserved partition, as you would expect since the cloning was done of the entire C: drive.
    Is it possible that changing the sectors that were part of the foreign file system to NTFS has caused them to now show up as re-allocated?
    I am thinking not, but thought I would get expert advice.

    Thanks,
    rstew
    Last edited by rstew; 2015-11-18 at 20:05.

  11. #11
    WS Lounge VIP
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    8,199
    Thanks
    48
    Thanked 986 Times in 916 Posts
    Uncorrectable sector count > 0 is bad, m'kay. That is data loss by another name.

    Windows GUI tools don't work with foreign (non FAT/NTFS) partitions, but you can use DISKPART to do it - select the disk and clean it.

    Sector re-allocation is done internally in response to read/write errors on the disk. Mucking around with partitions won't make any difference, but a full format may cause the disk to find / re-allocate, producing an increase in SMART errors.

    cheers, Paul

  12. #12
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    289
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
    Thanks Paul. Your comments are understood.
    Meanwhile I pulled the suspect drive and replaced it with another that has tested perfect. It is working well.
    On another machine I did a full format on the suspect drive and at some point past 70% it quit with a message that formatting could not be completed, and the drive disappeared completely from Disk Manager. Yikes!
    Wow, never had that happen before!
    So I will send that drive to the great hard drive wasteland in a faraway place!
    The lesson learned is to always run a full operational test on any used drive before putting it into use.
    The origins of the drive in question are somewhat misty, but it likely came out of a machine I parted out or upgraded, who knows.

    Thanks all,
    Rstew

  13. #13
    WS Lounge VIP
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    8,199
    Thanks
    48
    Thanked 986 Times in 916 Posts
    There is no need to do a full format of a new disk, it's just a good test of old dodgy drives.

    I have replaced two Seagate drives that went to silicon heaven, both bought around the same time. SMART monitoring is good, m'kay.
    CrystalDiskInfo SMART monitor: http://crystalmark.info/download/index-e.html

    cheers, Paul

  14. #14
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    289
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
    Interesting because this drive is also a Seagate, 1 TB of 2013 build date. I notice that all these newer drives are only about half the height of the same capacity drives of say 2012 and earlier. This one in fact is the same physical size as earlier 250 and 320 GB drives.
    So I suspect that means there are less platters than before and the sectors are more densely packed. To me this may mean they are more sensitive to mishandling and shock than earlier drives, who knows?
    One thing for sure, they generally run cooler than their predecessors.
    And they are likely cheaper to make, so that is probably the big incentive.

    The best,
    rstew

  15. #15
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
    Posts
    5,055
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 417 Times in 346 Posts
    It's a little known fact that hard disks to day cost about the same as they did 30 years ago - per kg.
    Cheers,

    Paul Edstein
    [MS MVP - Word]

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •