LinuxQuestions.org - disk fails as part of array, but i can reassemble it (then it gets lost again)

- Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)

- - disk fails as part of array, but i can reassemble it (then it gets lost again) (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/disk-fails-as-part-of-array-but-i-can-reassemble-it-then-it-gets-lost-again-902573/)

disk fails as part of array, but i can reassemble it (then it gets lost again)

hello everyone,
I seem to have lost a disk from an array of mine.

mdstat shows

Quote:

root@samothraki:~# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [multipath]
md126 : active raid1 sdf1[1] sdd1[0]
732466418 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]

md127 : active raid1 sde1[1](F) sdc1[0]
1465038451 blocks super 1.2 [2/1] [U_]

and /var/log/messages.1 states that:

Quote:

... (more of the same)
...
Sep 8 05:39:57 samothraki kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sde] Unhandled error code
Sep 8 05:39:57 samothraki kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sde] Result: hostbyte=0x04 driv
erbyte=0x00
Sep 8 05:39:57 samothraki kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sde] CDB: cdb[0]=0x2a: 2a 00 9f
91 00 3f 00 04 00 00
Sep 8 05:39:57 samothraki kernel: md: md127: recovery done.
Sep 8 05:39:57 samothraki kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sde] Unhandled error code
Sep 8 05:39:57 samothraki kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sde] Result: hostbyte=0x04 driv
erbyte=0x00
Sep 8 05:39:57 samothraki kernel: sd 3:0:0:0: [sde] CDB: cdb[0]=0x2a: 2a 00 9f
91 04 3f 00 00 80 00

the disk doesn't respond to smartctl calls
smartctl -a -d ata /dev/sde
smartctl 5.40 2010-10-16 r3189 [x86_64-slackware-linux-gnu] (local build)
Copyright (C) 2002-10 by Bruce Allen, http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net

Smartctl: Device Read Identity Failed (not an ATA/ATAPI device)

A mandatory SMART command failed: exiting. To continue, add one or more '-T permissive' options.

yet I can manage to rebuild the array...

should i go ahead and replace the volume?

thank you very much for your help

Your disk is dying. There is not much point persisting with it if it becomes unreliable.

arrghh.. its only 2-3 years old!!! how can it be?
i mean seriously, is it just the worst component or is there some other problem?
I have a 850W PSU and and 8x disks , and i have already replaced one of them...

Well - it may have been dropped at some stage. I work with servers with lots of disks. Where the high-end scsi stuff (10k rpm or 15k rpm) is expensive and very reliable, the lower end commodity sata stuff is just the opposite. We use high-capacity servers for online (ie disk-to-disk) backups of databases - for this we use large arrays of sata drives. And I can tell you, the more drives you have, the higher the chance of one failing. I suspect that that is simply the law of probability :-), but I'm not a maths/stats boffin. We buy extra drives and have them lying around waiting for fails - soon as it happens it's usually a hot-swap and we're off again. Disk goes into the bin! Your data is probably important to you - hence the 8 drive array. Chuck the drive.