A Computer hardware and components forum. ComputerBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ComputerBanter.com forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Storage (alt)
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 19th 09, 02:23 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Arno[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,441
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

Mike Tomlinson wrote:
In article , Yousuf Khan
writes


Well anyway, what I did recently was that I converted two of those old
IDE drives into SATA drives using an IDE-to-SATA converter board that
fits right onto the back of the drives themselves. I started noticing
that the Spin Retries were gone about two weeks ago, but that was only a
week after I installed them


I think the change in behaviour won't have anything to do with the
cables. A dodgy IDE cable is going to affect a lot more than the Spin
Retry count.


It's probably more to do with the fact hat you have now converted the
drive to SATA. Those plug-in converters are notoriously unreliable
(especially if you buy the ebay cheapo ones). I've used several
different ones with mixed results. How do you know the SMART data is
getting through from the drive correctly, if at all?


I have had reliability problems and compatibility problems
with these things, but never wrong SMART reports (I have tried
5 different ones). I would say if Yousuf gets SMART values
that they should be authentic.

Arno


  #22  
Old September 19th 09, 05:11 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
YKhan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 264
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

On Sep 18, 9:21*pm, Arno wrote:
But my theory would be auto-spin and if a command arrives before
spin-up is complete, have the spin-problem. It may just be that
it now has more time to complete spin-up before it needs to
answer requests.

Arno


Exactly what I was thinking.

Yousuf Khan
  #23  
Old September 19th 09, 05:23 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,600
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

YKhan wrote
Arno wrote


But my theory would be auto-spin and if a command
arrives before spin-up is complete, have the spin-problem.
It may just be that it now has more time to complete
spin-up before it needs to answer requests.


Exactly what I was thinking.


Thats still not going to result in an extra spin retry in the SMART stats.


  #24  
Old September 19th 09, 01:11 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Daniel Prince
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 142
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

Yousuf Khan wrote:

the reason this change was done was to eventually upgrade the
motherboard and processor down the road -- it's extremely difficult to
find new motherboards with more than one IDE channel anymore, so I am
preparing for the next generation.


I have a SIIG controller card with two IDE connections on it. My
brother has one too. Both work well. They are still available but
cost over $42.

http://3btech.net/siimsipciati.html

has a Silicon Image Sil0680 PCI ATA/133 IDE RAID Controller Card
with two IDE connections for $13.97 with free shipping.

If you do not have a free PCI slot for a SIIG controller, I have
seen a PCI-E card with one IDE connection, one SATA and one E-SATA
for $13.98 delivered.

http://www.microbarn.com/details.asp...rce=pricewatch
--
I don't understand why they make gourmet cat foods. I have
known many cats in my life and none of them were gourmets.
They were all gourmands!
  #25  
Old September 19th 09, 05:46 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,218
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

Rod Speed wrote:
Yousuf Khan wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Yousuf Khan wrote


I've also rebooted the system quite a bit more often than I usually do in that time. HD Sentinel is also now
starting to upgrade its Health rating automatically, it had gone down to 40% at its lowest and today it's at 52%.


I've never considered those numbers are very useful, what matters is the raw value.


Well, they seem to be based on the same criteria that we'd use to
judge quality: how many errors are there, and how often do they occur.


The raw numbers for that particular drive dont support those 40% and 52%
claims, particularly with a parameter like spin retry count thats much more
likely to be a problem external to the drive than internal to the drive.


Well, HD Sentinel uses some kind of proprietary internal rating
equation, which seems to be logarithmic (slows down as it gets closer to
zero). I don't concern myself too much with the absolute values they
come up with, just with the relative values. In this case the relative
values has indicated an improvement in health has been noted.

Yousuf Khan
  #26  
Old September 19th 09, 06:40 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,600
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

Yousuf Khan wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Yousuf Khan wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Yousuf Khan wrote


I've also rebooted the system quite a bit more often than I usually do in that time. HD Sentinel is also now
starting to upgrade its Health rating automatically, it had gone down to 40% at its lowest and today it's at 52%.


I've never considered those numbers are very useful, what matters is the raw value.


Well, they seem to be based on the same criteria that we'd use to
judge quality: how many errors are there, and how often do they occur.


The raw numbers for that particular drive dont support those 40% and 52% claims, particularly with a parameter like
spin retry count thats much more likely to be a problem external to the drive than internal to the drive.


Well, HD Sentinel uses some kind of proprietary internal rating equation, which seems to be logarithmic (slows down as
it gets closer to zero).


Its clearly terminally stupid to give that particular drive either
of those numbers to that particular drive when the bulk of
the causes for spin retry counts are external to the drive.

I don't concern myself too much with the absolute values they come up with, just with the relative values.


It makes a lot more sense to do that with the raw SMART numbers instead.

In this case the relative values has indicated an improvement in health has been noted.


But there isnt a shred of evidence that the health of the drive has changed one iota.


  #27  
Old September 19th 09, 10:30 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,218
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

Daniel Prince wrote:
I have a SIIG controller card with two IDE connections on it. My
brother has one too. Both work well. They are still available but
cost over $42.


Well, thanks, but obviously I already have my solutions in place.

Yousuf Khan
  #28  
Old September 19th 09, 10:32 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,218
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

Rod Speed wrote:
YKhan wrote
Arno wrote


But my theory would be auto-spin and if a command
arrives before spin-up is complete, have the spin-problem.
It may just be that it now has more time to complete
spin-up before it needs to answer requests.


Exactly what I was thinking.


Thats still not going to result in an extra spin retry in the SMART stats.


And why not?

Yousuf Khan
  #29  
Old September 19th 09, 11:35 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,600
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

Yousuf Khan wrote
Rod Speed wrote
YKhan wrote
Arno wrote


But my theory would be auto-spin and if a command
arrives before spin-up is complete, have the spin-problem.
It may just be that it now has more time to complete
spin-up before it needs to answer requests.


Exactly what I was thinking.


Thats still not going to result in an extra spin retry in the SMART stats.


And why not?


Because spin retry counts are THE DRIVE trying to the spin up the
drive and finding that the drive doesnt spin up when its supposed to.

The bios seeing that the drive isnt ready doesnt result in
an increase in the spin retry count in the SMART stats.


  #30  
Old October 16th 09, 07:55 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,218
Default I think I've solved my Spin Retry Count problem

Yousuf Khan wrote:
Daniel Prince wrote:
How long were your IDE cables? Were they flat or round?



They were around 20 inches long, from the furthest ends.

Now, they were rounded cables in both cases. I had thought of using flat
cables, but in the crowded conditions in my case it was pretty difficult
to use them without moving a lot of stuff around. Plus the rounded
cables gave better cooling.


Just an update on this old issue. I finally got a chance to try the same
drives with the flat IDE cables, and the results were the same as when
using the rounded ones. Still no spin retry problem when using the SATA
converters and cables, but the problem always crops up when using any
sort of IDE cable.


Yousuf Khan
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Should I worry about Spin Retry Count? Yousuf Khan Storage (alt) 18 July 7th 09 10:58 PM
Problem already solved but Iwant to learn what caused the problem. TIA Rod Speed General 7 October 16th 06 03:14 AM
Idle time spin-down-spin-up for disks? How often is too often? Al Dykes Storage (alt) 3 March 10th 06 10:05 AM
Capture oversaturation issue solved...whoops, not solved Emile IV Nvidia Videocards 0 March 7th 06 07:35 AM
Disk won't spin up/Possible voltage problem Paul General 42 April 28th 04 05:06 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 ComputerBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.