Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I finally got back to Linux (MEPIS), after being without it for months because some video problem prevented my old failing computer from running it. I reinstalled both Linux and Windows from scratch on this new computer, and some of the many problems I encountered in the transition made me wonder if my main hard drive is failing. (I didn't expect it to, because I bought it at about this time last year.) What Linux software should I use to check its integrity?
The problem with smart is that a study has shown that it only gives prior warning of failure in about 50% cases in which failure is imminent. The other 50% just fail without anything showing up in smart.
So don't let the fact that smart doesn't show you anything bad convince you that a backup isn't advisable...
Thanks! That's a really useful document. Shame it doesn't offer any practical advice yet.
Yes, there is a lot of detail in there (maybe too much for some people), but what I've taken away from it is:
SMART is nice; SMART us useful; but as I said earlier, its only in about 50% of cases that SMART gives you a warning of imminent disk drive failure
Its easy to over-estimate the contribution of temperature to premature disk drive failures. It still seems worth trying to keep environmental temperatures reasonable, but it is unclear that this is going to give you much of a win in reducing disk drive failure rate.
Some disk drives are less reliable than others. Whether you are 'lucky' with your disk drive supplier can have a bigger impact on overall reliability than the more obvious things like temperature, and it could be a 'bad' batch or a 'bad' manufacturer issue
Oh, and even in spite of all that info on failures, disk drives are quite reliable really these days. You are more likely to lose data to an operator error than to a hardware failure.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.