On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:56:16 +0100 Ivan Voras <ivo...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Yes, it's Seagate. Statistically I have the least problems with their > drives. But I imagine that lack of standardization about these > statistics very much limits the usability of SMART, right? > The main problem with SMART appears to be that it's not an accurate predictor of drive failure, according to a study done at Google - see http://labs.google.com/papers/disk_failures.pdf -- Bruce Cran _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
