Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin <at> googlemail.com> writes:
> Am 13.11.2014 um 01:01 schrieb Adam Carter:
> "Backblaze's analysis of nearly 40,000 drives
Always suspect a vendor's purpose for fingering others. It
may be valid, but often tainted.
Were SSD and other storage devices included? Where operating
systems were the drives used on? A myriad of parameters
might be insightful....ymmv.
> SMART 5 - Reallocated_Sector_Count.
> SMART 187 - Reported_Uncorrectable_Errors.
> SMART 188 - Command_Timeout.
> SMART 197 - Current_Pending_Sector_Count.
> SMART 198 - Offline_Uncorrectable"
>
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2846009/the-5-smart-stats-that-actually-predict-hard-drive-failure.html
> everybody with half a brain would figure that one out themselves.
Volker is onto something here. Another consideration is which of these
(maybe all 5?) can be tracked or have a module developed and included
into your favorite NMS, like nagios or jffnms. Collect up the data
trend it yourself and auto_generate graphs and or reports. So what
is really important is which ones can be included via snmp or whatever
protocol into your favorite NMS?
Something that relies of something from this vendor, that is not
opensource, is worthless noise, imho.
hth,
James
