The gentlest reminder to replace a storage device?

[mikeymikec]

I have a portable hard drive (a pretty old Seagate 160GB) that I've only used for temporary data transit for some time (ie. there's always a second copy of data elsewhere), but when I decided to test a rar file that I had just transferred to it, multiple CRC errors occurred. The original of the file tested fine.

The reason why I tested the archive first was that during the transfer, the data throughput graph was the type that involves massive I/O spikes and long periods of low activity. I'm used to this kind of graph when transferring from SSD to HDD, but this was HDD to HDD (though admittedly the old seagate is USB 2.0 and the internal HDD is a 2-year old WD Black).

The transfer graph looked identical when transferring the same file to another portable HDD I have (USB 2.0 again, slightly newer), but it tested fine after the transfer.

I'm inclined to believe that the 160GB has had its day, though I'm curious to think what others here think. The PC I'm transferring from is my own and I'm not aware of any I/O issues with it apart from this incident.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

That's suspicious. Check SMART status?

Do more than one file/copy test. USB 2 will throttle the heck out of an HDD, so I'd expect that to be bottlenecking your copies regardless.

 

[mikeymikec]

SMART was OK. I'm trying another copy test now (deleting the bad CRC file first).

- edit - It managed the copy on the second go without any problems.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

SMART was OK. I'm trying another copy test now (deleting the bad CRC file first).

- edit - It managed the copy on the second go without any problems.

Well, I'd probably "best 3 out of 5." Or rather, "Best 499 out of 500." But that's still a good sign.

 

[PliotronX]

Russia hacked in and out of all the nasty things they could have done, masterfully and covertly corrupted one copy while leaving the original alone. At least that's what the trend in finger pointing is these days 😀

 

[sinisterDei]

I certainly wouldn't trust it with important shit. Plus, you can get a thumbdrive that holds the same amount of data for like... $20. Or a replacement disk drive that holds way more data for like $50.

I'll say this, I put an older SSD in an external 2.5" USB 3.1 enclosure, and it's *amazing* to be able to copy shit to and from the external drive (which is still 250GB) at nearly 300 MB/s. It's a bit of a game changer when it comes to measuring how long it'll take to take a system backup of a client's data, or to copy a database from one system to another, or a couple seasons of a TV show, or anything.

 

[Charlie98]

I've got an older Seagate 500GB USB3 portable... it's got bad sectors but it's still going strong after all these years, approaching 30K hours. I use it as my driver and program stash now, and to transfer large video files to the HTPC... nothing critical. I've found the Seagate USB cable to be very sensitive to position, or more likely the drive's plug itself... one of my newer 2TB Seagates the stars have to be in precise alignment and the moon in the 7th house to get it to work... so yours may not be the drive itself, necessarily.