From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Mar 29 13:43:36 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D39EF7754F for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 13:43:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.not-for.work (onlyone.not-for.work [IPv6:2a01:4f8:201:6350::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D56A6EADE for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 13:43:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [192.168.23.186] (unknown [89.113.128.32]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.not-for.work (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37E54FAB; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 16:43:29 +0300 (MSK) Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: smart(8) Call for Testing To: Chuck Tuffli Cc: Rainer Duffner , Charles Sprickman , Tom Evans via freebsd-fs References: <4754cb2f-76bb-a69b-0cf5-eff4d621eb29@callfortesting.org> <1d3f2cef-4c37-782e-7938-e0a2eebc8842@quip.cz> <7ED27465-1BC2-4522-873E-9ECE192EB7A2@ultra-secure.de> From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 16:43:28 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 13:43:36 -0000 On 29.03.2018 16:27, Chuck Tuffli wrote: >>> Maybe one of the vendors who sells FreeBSD as part of an appliance has shown some interest in this? >>> >>> If you’re hardware is well-defined and thus the output is consistent, I could imagine it’s not too difficult to parse this. >> smartd is very important part of smartmontools, smartctl is not so. >> >> And periodic self-test triggering & check is most important feature of >> smartd, IMHO. >> >> Modern HDDs are liers in SMART. And only regular self-test discover >> real errors on surfaces in my experience. >> >> So, tool without support for HDD self-tests is of little usage for >> appliances, IMHO. > Thank you for the feedback! As I don't have any experience with > smartd, can you help me better understand which parts of it are most > useful to you? Is it just periodically triggering the self test or > are there other features as well? For example, logging the SMART > values, emailing / triggering notifications when certain criteria are > met, monitoring the self tests, reading the error logs, etc.? Triggering of short and full self-tests and alerting (via e-mail) when test failed. Monitoring of values and alerting is VERY important (number of Relocations is main indicator of spinning HDD health and when it raises it must be known ASAP), but it could be implemented with simple smart(8) utility and some scripting, so this is not problem. But all my dead HDDs were replaced on self-test fail — it is what allows me to replace them BEFORE data were lost. -- // Lev Serebryakov