Jump to content
Covecube Inc.
  • Announcements

    • Christopher (Drashna)

      Login issues   11/07/17

      If you have issues with logging in, make sure you use your display name and not the "username" or email.  Or head here for more info.   http://community.covecube.com/index.php?/topic/3252-login-issues/  
    • Christopher (Drashna)

      Getting Help   11/07/17

      If you're experiencing problems with the software, the best way to get ahold of us is to head to https://stablebit.com/Contact, especially if this is a licensing issue.    Issues submitted there are checked first, and handled more aggressively. So, especially if the problem is urgent, please head over there first. 
  • 0
majones

LCC Warning Threshold on Seagate External Drives

Question

I've got a couple of worrisome Seagate 4TB Expansion drives with high (>300,000) LCC's, and I'm a bit confused that one (ST4000DM001) is shown as OK under SMART with an LCC of 444,543 and the other (ST4000DM001) has a warning with an LCC of 300,794. I see that SMART is using "non-manufacturer specific" interpretation rules for the first (higher LCC but no warning) and "Seagate Desktop HDD.15" for the second (lower LCC but with warning). I'm just wondering why the different interpretation rules, and whether LCC > 300,000 is OK for the ST4000DM001?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Looking at the BitFlock data, these are definitely different generation disks.  The model numbers are slightly different, and the firmware versions are definitely different.  So they're classified as different generations/models, and are handled slightly different.

 

That's the reason for the discrepancy. 

 

 

However, let me flag this for the developer, to confirm.

 

https://stablebit.com/Admin/IssueAnalysis/27594

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I've got a couple of worrisome Seagate 4TB Expansion drives with high (>300,000) LCC's, and I'm a bit confused that one (ST4000DM001) is shown as OK under SMART with an LCC of 444,543 and the other (ST4000DM001) has a warning with an LCC of 300,794. I see that SMART is using "non-manufacturer specific" interpretation rules for the first (higher LCC but no warning) and "Seagate Desktop HDD.15" for the second (lower LCC but with warning). I'm just wondering why the different interpretation rules, and whether LCC > 300,000 is OK for the ST4000DM001?

something for you to think about, and it keeps your drives from going to sleep, https://keepalivehd.codeplex.com/. 

I've have some laptop grade Hitachi drives, knowing in advance that they had the same problem as the WD greens, going to sleep after a few seconds of inactivity, and with scanner pinging your drives for smart data (you can change the freqency in the settings), LCC would run up on the drives, this tool, rights a small file every few second and keeps them spinning.  After 3 years and 190 days on one drive, and 3 years 250 days on the other drive, they drives are still going strong, the drive letter was changed for one of the drives, something I did and forgot to update the tool, and the LCC is over 500K on that one, but 5347 on the other one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×