Jump to content
Covecube Inc.

Grant

Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  1. Ok, I think I see what's happening here. I had a brand new fresh out of the package drive of the same model to test - on the brand new drive, it seems to interpret everything properly - it matches what CrystalDiskInfo and Kingston's own SSD Toolkit show. But on my older drive, it where it says 1% life left, it's wrong. Kingston's SSD Manager shows SSD Wear Indicator at 100% for the brand new drive, and 99% for the older one. CrystalDiskInfo shows a raw hex value for attribute E7 of 64 for the new drive, 63 for the old drive - that's equivelent to 100 and 99 in decimal. But CrystalDiskInfo shows the current value as 100 for the new disk and 1 for the old disk. Attached is a screenshot of all 3 programs. I think both Stablebit Scanner and CrystalDiskInfo are interpreting the value wrong. It looks like the raw value is the actually % life left, starting at 100 and counting down, not the normalized way many SMART values are interpreted. Kingston's SSD Manager interprets the value correctly.
  2. Wait...are we sure that's right? It says 1% life left. But also says life time writes is only 391GB, average erase count 2 and max erase count 5. And power on time only 11 days Either some of those numbers are off, or this is an even crappier SSD than I thought it was.
  3. Well, glad I asked you to add it ...it must have refreshed on its own since I just got an email that disk has 1% life left. Kinda wish I hadn't installed the OS on it now. Thanks!
  4. Most of the important fields come up as unknown, so it's not able to determine how much life is left. Model: Kingston SA400S37240G Bitflock ID: 4FUVYYWO Drive datasheet: https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/SA400S37_us.pdf Was recently added to smartmontools if the info there helps you at all: https://www.smartmontools.org/ticket/801
  5. Oh, I should also mention that I use Scanner as well, and all of my disks are working perfectly as far as I can tell. No hardware errors, and I'm just removing drives to move to a different server.
  6. I am having the exact same issue. With DrivePool_VerifyAfterCopy enabled, some files show "Fail copy verification failed." Disabling verification makes the duplication work properly, and after it finished I have found the files and hashed each copy - they are identical. This is happening any time it has to duplicate a bunch of files - most noticably after removing a drive. In fact, I was only able to remove a drive by either choosing duplicate later, or disabling verification. Drivepool version 2.1.1.561 Would you like me to send in my logs so you can check it out? Or are hkarpf6045's sufficient?
  7. I have a Mushkin Enhanced ECO2 (Model MKNSSDEC240GB) SSD. Brand new, has been powered on for 3 hours. Stablebit scanner giving me warnings for Soft Read Error Rate. But I don't think that the SMART data is being interpreted correctly. Several forum posts I found seem to confirm that this is not a sign the drive is failing, just normal values for this model. Using CrystalDiskInfo, I see that attributes 01 (Raw Read Error Rate), C3 (On-the-fly ECC Uncorrectable Error Count), C9 (Uncorrectable Soft Read Error Rate) and CC (Soft ECC Correction Rate) all show the same value, which keeps increasing every time I refresh. Tried with 2.5.1.3062 and beta 2.5.2.3103, get the same results. It says that it is using non-manufacturer specific interpretation rules. I have submitted it to Bitflock - ID 67QSGP8S Some other forums say that it is just misinterpreting the data from this particular SSD (because everyone decided to use different attributes and values for their SSDs. Just to make life more interesting). See the posts by MushkinSean at these links: http://poweredbymushkin.com/index.php/forum/mushkin-solid-state-drives/86-s-m-a-r-t-attribute-201.html http://poweredbymushkin.com/index.php/forum/mushkin-solid-state-drives/1073-mushkin-enhanced-chronos-mknssdcr120gb-2-5-120gb.html I'm guessing you guys just need to figure out the right way to interpret the data from this particular SSD?
  8. Ok, more information. It works properly, showing the right size and data for the storage space drive, until I enable Unsafe under DirectIO (needed for it to work with my LSI MegaRAID SAS 9240-8i controller). Once I enabled Unsafe DirectIO, and restarted the service, I started getting SMART data for the drives on the LSI controller, but the storage space started showing all the properties of my OS drive again.
  9. I tried sfc, and the resetrepository part. Neither fixed it. However, uninstalling scanner, moving it's files in ProgramData, and reinstalling seems to have fixed it. Disk details, size, everything shows up properly now (except smart data isn't available at all).
  10. Nope, only thick provisioned. I didn't let the scan actually finish, so I'm not sure what it would have done if I let it scan the whole disk. But looking at the drive map, it looks like the scanner starts testing at the end of the disk, and scanner shows the drive as being 932GB (actual size is 201GB) so I'm guessing scanner did something like this: Scanner: Hey storage space drive, read whatever is at 932GB for me. Storage drive: I don't have a 932GB... Scanner: Hmm, that block must be defective. Read what's at 931GB... Storage drive: There is no such block! Dude, I'm only a 200GB drive! Scanner: Hmm, must be defective. My guess is, if I let it run, it would show the blocks that actually exist as good - I can test that hypothesis if you think it would be useful information.
  11. I panicked this morning because I got alerts that a drive was failing. Turns out it had started scanning the storage space drive. As far as I can tell, the storage space is NOT failing, but Scanner was trying to scan it's supposed 1TB of space - it only has 200GB. I've turned off the checks for that drive for now.
  12. I enabled NoWMI, then tried restarting the service. Didn't change anything. Tried rebooting the entire server, still didn't change anything. For the resetting metadata - no, I don't have any backups of the ProgramData folder. But I would be willing to completely uninstall and go through the whole process of upgrading to see if it happens again and get you the files before and after installing the beta, if that would help.
  13. Thanks for looking into it. Minor side note: Installing the beta version cleared all my manually set locations for the disks. Is that normal?
  14. Beta build 2.5.2.31000 shows the same behavior.
  15. Yes, it's definitely showing disk details and smart info from my OS drive. Side by side screenshots of the OS disk and storage space drives: https://imgur.com/a/7KbqF#g4A0THu Version is v2.5.1.3062 I'm trying the beta build now.
×
×
  • Create New...