On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 12:33:33PM -0700, Fred Cisin wrote: > >> I suppose that bad sector maps for ST506/412 hard drives don't count? :-)
Once upon a time, it was the job of the OS to take this badblock count and remap blocks itself since the drives themselves weren't smart enough. > > On Mon, 3 Aug 2015, ben wrote: > > If is that bad, time for a new drive. > In the early days, particularly when actual ST506 and ST412 were common > drives, there were VERY VERY few that had no bad tracks. > > In the days of ST506/412 drives every responsible manufacturer included a > list of bad tracks. In the early days, there were plenty. That was one > of several reasons why reputable hard drive manufacturers rounded the > capacity down, rather than peddling them with the size stated to half a > dozen "significant" digits. Would you rather have a "10 Meg" drive that > formatted out to 10.1Mebibytes, or one that formatted to 10.1Mebibytes > that was sold as being "10.653696 Meg" ("WOW! This drive is so good that > it gave me MORE capacity than it was rated for!") > > > For a brief while, Spinrite defaulted to retoring to service any BAD > TRACKS that passed Spinrite's tests! That was based on the assumption > that a simple read/write test is surely far more trustworthy than the > special hardware and software that the manufacturer used to decide to > tell you not to trust that track. > > -- > Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com > -- - d...@freebsd.org d...@db.net http://www.db.net/~db