Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Bad and Weak Sectors


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 DJS063

DJS063

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 05 October 2013 - 01:43 PM

O.K. it started out i had problem with system restore not working,error code.I ran at elevated command prompt for both drives used chkdsk /f /r then dism /online /cleanup-image /restorehealth and scandisk.That seemed to fix the problem with system restore.

 

After checking the log for chkdsk and saw i had bad sectors on d: drive i believe this drive caused system restore not to work.

 

Now i use a program called Hard Disk Sentinel it says health on D:drive is 95% and performance is 100%.I receive on the main screen for the D: drive,there are 8 weak sectors found on the disk surface.They may be able to be remapped any time in later use of the disk.

 

When using program to run a surface test get error unable to lock the disk for exclusive use d:\error: access is denied,

 

Hard disk sentinel says to just continue ignore lock error.I read in a forum about fixingproblems seen in logs in program and after running chkdsk by reinitialise disk surface after a surface test,saying the sectors will be likely fixed and the errors will be removed health will increase.I know this process can wipe whole drive,it warns you of it but there is nothing on the drive now it's my second disk not primary.

 

What there help says about it:

Reinitialize disk surface -

     Overwrites the disk surface with special initialization pattern to restore the sectors to default (empty) status and reads back sector contents, to verify if they are accessible and consistent.

    Forces the analysis of any weak sectors and verifies any hidden problems and fixes them by reallocation of bad sectors (this
is drive regeneration).

    Enables better use of the disk as after the test the spare area will be used instead of any problematic sectors.Very intensive and time-consuming
test, especially if the level (the number of overwrite cycles) is set to higher value.The simple version of this test is usually (incorrectly) called as low level format by.other tools. It can be effectively used to permanently destruct stored information (Navso P-5239-26 standard data destruction).

Each tests have different configuration options:
using Disk -> Surface test -> Reinitialise disk surface, the sectors will be likely fixed and the errors will be removed from the text description (and the health% will increase as well).Basically the "weak" sectors are not bad sectors. Most of the time, they even not related to hard disk problems as non-standard shutdown (reset/power failure) can cause this status for a particular sector.The drive marks these sectors as "pending" for reallocation. So on further disk usage these sectors may or may not be reallocated.Usually if you perform a Disk -> Surface test -> Read test, it properly shows the location of these sectors Also Disk -> Surface test -> Reinitialise disk surface test forces the hard disk to verify the status of the sector and re-allocate (to prevent further using of that sector) OR to remove this "pending" (weak) status if the sector seems to be usable.

Question is will this work to fix and improve the drive?Not an old drive.Only a year old Hitachi 1 TB SATA III 6gbs.Any Advice would be appreciated.TY


Edited by hamluis, 05 October 2013 - 04:13 PM.


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 hamluis

hamluis

    Moderator


  • Moderator
  • 56,289 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killeen, TX
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 05 October 2013 - 04:13 PM

I have a paid version of Hard Disk Sentinel.

 

First of all...you need to understand what bad sectors are...and what they can imply.

 

Bad sectors don't get "fixed"...they are just not used.  Every hard drive, even brand new ones...come with bad sectors.  The process of formatting recognizes whether a sector is bad or not...and bypasses it for formatting and data storage.

 

A 1TB hard drive, brand new...HDDs of exactly   1.0 TB  have: 1,953,125,000  sectors (give or take a few).  Looking at that, you can see that the number of bad sectors is not necessarily the most important consideration.

 

Along with the bad sectors that appear before format and are not part of the formatted partition...a partition can begin to reflect bad sectors after it has been formatted.  These are problematical for 2 reasons, IMO:

    a.  Data stored on bad sectors may not function properly and may not be capable of being moved to good sectors by running the chkdsk /r command.

    b.  The appearance of bad sectors on a partition...can be an indicator of hard drive damage that may increase, thus endangering the entire partition or parts thereof.

 

If you believe and understand what I said...the best thing that you can do is to...first, backup whatever data you deem valuable ...from the partition reflecting the bad sectors.

 

The next step I would make...would be to then try running the chkdsk /r command on the partition reflecting the bad sectors, understanding that the chkdsk /r command will TRY to move any data files found on bad sectors...to good sectors.  It won't necessarily be successful.

 

The last step that I would take...would be to attempt a partition/drive scan, using the diagnostic tool available at the website of the hard drive manufacturer.  This scan will be non-destructive but it will apprise you of the functional status of the hard drive.

 

I would not use Hard Disk Sentinel to scan a drive...unless I was almost sure that the drive was toast.  But I would take a snapshot of the SMART data presented for that drive and post it here where someone with more ability than I possess...could tell if SMART indicated problems.

 

Hard Disk Sentinel offers 2 types of scans, one is destructive (Write), one is nondestructive (Read only), with the long test/diagnostic always being preferred because it's more complete.  I try the nondesructive before using the destructive scan.

 

A drive's age has nothing to do iwth it's failure or anticipating such...the SMART data and manufacturer's diagnostics are probably better (IMO) at predicting failrure than just considering when the drive was acquired/placed in service.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Louis



#3 DJS063

DJS063
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 05 October 2013 - 06:26 PM

O.K. i do have some understandings of this topic,i come here when i am not sure and learn.I downloaded one program from HGST. cause drive is a Hitachi this is there site i will run a long scan post results plus a SMART log.Also may run another chkdsk post that too.This is a second drive on system,D: data not my primary has only one partition.Nothing on it right now,everything is backed up on an external drive.Thanks for your input and help.


Edited by DJS063, 05 October 2013 - 06:28 PM.


#4 hamluis

hamluis

    Moderator


  • Moderator
  • 56,289 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killeen, TX
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 05 October 2013 - 07:00 PM

Just a note...the HGST offers two utilities, which are not the same.  Make sure that the one you download is for the Drive Fitness Test, not the Windows Drive Fitness or something similar.  You want the one dating from 2009.

 

Louis



#5 DJS063

DJS063
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 05 October 2013 - 10:50 PM

O.K. yes i used DFT drive fitness,did a  ext. read  surface scan and copied the S.M.A.R.T i attached both  to this post.ty if you can look,sorry for way i showed the smart one,had hard time figuring a way to do it,so it is in 2 parts.I will try to run another chkdsk post it too,ty Looks like it passed surface test to me.
 
DFT-Win HGST HDD Diagnostic TEST
         Copyright © 2012 HGST

-------------------------------------------------------------

      DATE       :  10/05/2013 19:57:57


DRIVE INFORMATION
        Serial Number     : MSK5235H0KDGBG
        Model             : Hitachi HDS721010DLE630
        Firmware Rev.     : MS2OA5R0
        Capacity          : 931GB
        SMART Status      : Healthy

Test Log

        ReadErrStat       : Done
        Result            : Pass
        Date/Time         : 10/05/2013 17:57:01


        SMART QT          : Done
        Result            : Pass
        Date/Time         : 10/05/2013 17:57:01


        ReadErrStat       : Done
        Result            : Pass
        Date/Time         : 10/05/2013 19:56:27


        SURFACE ET        : Done
        Result            : Pass
        Date/Time         : 10/05/2013 19:56:27

Attached Files


Edited by DJS063, 05 October 2013 - 10:51 PM.


#6 hamluis

hamluis

    Moderator


  • Moderator
  • 56,289 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killeen, TX
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 06 October 2013 - 08:55 AM

You ran the wrong version, you need the one listed under CD Image Version at https://www1.hgst.com/hdd/support/download.htm#DFT .

 

The DFT-Win version is for drives used for storage, will not produce reliable data on boot drives reflecting the O/S.

 

See page 5 of https://www1.hgst.com/hdd/support/download.htm#DFT , note sentence which states "WinDFT is not designed to run on your primary operating drive."

 

If you download the CD Image listed on the page I linked to...and also read the Drive Fitness Test User's Guide...;you can accomplish the desired result.

 

Louis



#7 DJS063

DJS063
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 06 October 2013 - 10:48 AM

O.k. i will get the appropriate one.Also  i ran another chkdsk /f /r then a DISM.exe Deployment Image Servicing Management Tool and scandisk on D: Drive.DISM said - The restore operation completed successfully.The Component store corruption was repaired.Scandisk no integrity violations were found.Chkdsk i posted here showed no bad sectors found but you may know more if relocated them.First time i ran chkdsk told you took many hours not only found some bad sectors but unindexed files bad clusters sorts other things,was a mess on first chkdsk,does seem better on next two,last one showed 4KB bad sectors.Take a look at this one,let me know.Thank you.In meantime i will run tool you mentioned.

 

TimeCreated : 10/6/2013 11:02:46 AM
Message     :             
              Checking file system on D:
              The type of the file system is NTFS.
              Volume label is Data.
              
              A disk check has been scheduled.
              Windows will now check the disk.                         
              
              CHKDSK is verifying files (stage 1 of 5)...
                256 file records processed.                                         
              File verification completed.
                0 large file records processed.                                   
                0 bad file records processed.                                     
              
              CHKDSK is verifying indexes (stage 2 of 5)...
                288 index entries processed.                                        
              Index verification completed.
                0 unindexed files scanned.                                        
                0 unindexed files recovered.                                      
              
              CHKDSK is verifying security descriptors (stage 3 of 5)...
              Cleaning up 12 unused index entries from index $SII of file 0x9.
              Cleaning up 12 unused index entries from index $SDH of file 0x9.
              Cleaning up 12 unused security descriptors.
              Security descriptor verification completed.
                17 data files processed.                                           
              CHKDSK is verifying Usn Journal...
                234160 USN bytes processed.                                            
              Usn Journal verification completed.
              
              CHKDSK is verifying file data (stage 4 of 5)...
                240 files processed.                                                
              File data verification completed.
              
              CHKDSK is verifying free space (stage 5 of 5)...
                244022674 free clusters processed.                                        
              Free space verification is complete.
              
              Windows has scanned the file system and found no problems.
              No further action is required.
              
               976759807 KB total disk space.
                  572812 KB in 35 files.
                      24 KB in 18 indexes.
                       0 KB in bad sectors.
                   96275 KB in use by the system.
                   65536 KB occupied by the log file.
               976090696 KB available on disk.
              
                    4096 bytes in each allocation unit.
               244189951 total allocation units on disk.
               244022674 allocation units available on disk.
              
              Internal Info:
              00 01 00 00 41 00 00 00 3d 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ....A...=.......
              01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
              00 00 31 97 e9 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ..1.............
            



#8 DJS063

DJS063
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 06 October 2013 - 11:33 AM

Alright this bootable DFT is not recognizing the drives,box is empty.First on screen it asks 2 choices Default 1.SCSI and ATA 2.ATA only,tried twice using both.When i used the first option it asked for controller type which is not listed,i tried a few.In either case the drives do not show up in box where drives should be.At one point in a choice it asked for serial number of the drive.Also some point telling me was defective.I may be wrong saying this but the drive we are testing is my second drive not operating system drive and is on BUS 1,operating is on BUS 0,these are both SATA 3 drives.You may know more then i do,me telling you this.If i use the serial number cause it could not find drive i am not sure if that will make it work.Let me know.I have Windows 8 Pro on system.Prior post may say more about conditions of bad sectors on this drive too,if needed to go further,plus if the SMART report helped if it was correct for you,TY


Edited by DJS063, 06 October 2013 - 11:36 AM.


#9 hamluis

hamluis

    Moderator


  • Moderator
  • 56,289 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killeen, TX
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 06 October 2013 - 11:40 AM

Did you read the guide for using the DFT?

 

Louis



#10 DJS063

DJS063
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 06 October 2013 - 04:05 PM

yes i did,i look again,what about what you seen in my posts,results of chkdsk and others?



#11 hamluis

hamluis

    Moderator


  • Moderator
  • 56,289 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killeen, TX
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 06 October 2013 - 05:32 PM

Frankly...chkdsk results are of lesser importance.

 

If the hard drive is functionally unsound...nothing can be expected to run properly that relies on accessing files on the hard drive...including chkdsk /r results and the results of the sfc /scannow command.  Those results would be meaningless because they will only reflect problems with files or file structure...without asserting whether or not the hard drive is the source of those errors.

 

The results of the DFT are far more important and informative...than any chkdsk /r results, onscreen error messages, etc.  That's why this topic is in the Internal Hardware forum...it's a hardware concern.

 

Louis



#12 DJS063

DJS063
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 06 October 2013 - 06:38 PM

I made CD disc from ISO file,i booted from disc,menu came up i get these two choices 1. SCSI and ATA support 2. ATA support only. If chose the first one and it asks for a certain controller none look familiar even though i picked two at different times.Other try i choice 2nd option,then i was not asked for a type of controller just went to menu were it did not find any drives an error,shows Checklist reasons why it may not of found anything,one choice was jumper settings which i do not need any for SATA,next would be check cable plugged in,this i know would not be working.Then after says continue,ask me for serial number thinking more on lines of looking for warranties,maybe or way to recognize it,this to me does not make sense though.What about this in manual i know i do have Intel?
Configurations NOT supported:  ♦ Drives attached using ATA RAID controllers where direct access to the attached devices is blocked by the controller also not supported are Multi-Channel SCSI RAID controllers. ♦ Serial-ATA controllers based on the Silicon Image Promise and Intel chipsets are not currently supported.O.K. you say chkdsk not relevant but also felt you thought Hard disk sentinel reports weren't either but more so DFT'S.What if this software tells me same as Sentinel did in ways,should i have taken advice of that one,sentinel,reinitialise, or either way will not fix it?Drive is barely a year old if that makes any difference.


Edited by DJS063, 06 October 2013 - 06:44 PM.


#13 DJS063

DJS063
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:31 PM

Listen the hard rive does not show any signs of  being functionally unsound at all.Was the stuff Hard Disk Sentinel showed me as of 8 weak sectors,but health and performance was fine.Which was reason make me feel was an issue,but i did not notice one when using this drive.So i asked for advice on what that program was telling me i may need to do if it got worse.At the first chkdsk the drive went through a long process to finish,finding alot,by second one only 4kb bad sectors,also using DISM in command prompt on 2nd chkdsk.By the third one i saw no more bad sectors,through DFT that you said was the wrong one,cause i used it through windows saw nothing wrong.Now some on other forums said it is all good from just chkdsk.I am not completely sure as you may be,but it looks to me the drive is fine for now and i am not going to go further.I appreciate your help and thank you for all you did so far.If i need more help i will repost it, :thumbsup2:


Edited by DJS063, 07 October 2013 - 04:34 PM.


#14 jhayz

jhayz

  • BC Advisor
  • 6,922 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:24 AM

Posted 07 October 2013 - 08:03 PM

The 2nd image of your first post shows reallocated sector count http://www.ariolic.com/activesmart/smart-attributes/reallocated-sectors-count.html


Tekken
 


#15 DJS063

DJS063
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.Y.
  • Local time:04:24 PM

Posted 07 October 2013 - 10:34 PM

Well it says it can be critical even though i do not notice it yet.I will just have to keep monitoring it over time,if it gets worse i will change it.Right now it is a second drive on PC,everthing i put on it is backed up.


Edited by DJS063, 07 October 2013 - 10:34 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users