Re: bad sector / bad block support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 8:30 PM Christopher Staples
<mastercatz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> will their ever be a better way to handle bad sectors ?  I keep
> getting silent corruption from random bad sectors
> scrubs keep passing with out showing any errors , but if I do a
> ddrescue backup to a new drive I find the bad sectors

Bad sectors manifest in two ways: the drive reports UNC on read or
write, or Btrfs reports a checksum mismatch.

If Btrfs isn't catching it, but the data is wrong, it's probably a
memory problem that causes the corruption and subsequently a checksum
computation based on that corruption which is why Btrfs thinks it's
correct.

> I like btrfs for the snapshot ability , but when it comes to keeping
> data safe ext4 seems better ? at least it looks for bad sectors and
> marks them , btrfs just seems to write and assumes its written ..

That's the wrong way of looking at it.

If there are a small number of bad physical sectors, upon write, the
drive firmware will remap the LBA to a reserve sector. There's no
appearance of bad sectors outside the drive at all, and no error
reported. That's normal behavior. If the drive has a lot of bad
sectors, eventually all the reserve sectors get used up, and now the
drive has to report UNC on write - a write error. This is a device
that's inevitably going to betray you with far worse problems and data
loss, so papering over it with an external bad sector map isn't
something anyone will recommend in a data integrity context. Replace
the drive.

-- 
Chris Murphy



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux