On 13 November 2014 19:35:57 CET, James <wirel...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >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
James, Backblaze is not selling harddrives. They sell storage on their servers. The data they collect is based on different drives from different manufacturers. They are quite open on what they use, check out their website and blogposts. You should find the answers to your questions easily there. -- Joost -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
