Sorry, this offer has expired. Set up a deal alert and get notified of future deals like this. Add a Deal Alert

Expired Hot Deals

Sorry, this offer has expired.
Set up a deal alert and get notified of future deals like this.
Set up a Deal Alert
Amazon.ca

Seagate Ironwolf 6TB NAS-appropriate Internal HDD $171.99

  • Last Updated:
  • May 2nd, 2021 9:23 pm
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 20, 2004
3736 posts
4141 upvotes
Montreal, QC
alpovs wrote: Do you know how TLER works? What if the drive needs more time to reallocate sectors. TLER will make the drive available in short time but the drive still needs more time to reallocate sectors. What happens in this scenario? Does the drive postpones the procedure? Does the drive do it in a series of short dropouts?
I don't know the exact values, but this is more relevant on h/w raid controllers. Each model would vary on the max timeout before marking a disk as offline. Old 3ware card I think use to be something like like 20 seconds, and on newer LSI cards, it is something like 10 seconds. On s/w RAID which most of these NAS units use, this could in theory easily be adjusted in software. However I think by default the mimic the values of h/w raid controllers. The problem is that after being marked as offline, you can put it back online and resync the array, but it is painful and the added load during the sync could cause another drive to be marked offline. And if the sync is not done, and if you were in something like a RAID 5, you would effectively lose your data.

So if there is an error, the drive would be allowed to do error recovery for about 7 seconds (value could be different depending on brand/implementation), after that, they return control to the RAID controller which would handle any error recovery.
Deal Fanatic
Sep 16, 2013
7239 posts
4891 upvotes
SW ON
Emporium wrote: I don't know the exact values, but this is more relevant on h/w raid controllers. Each model would vary on the max timeout before marking a disk as offline. Old 3ware card I think use to be something like like 20 seconds, and on newer LSI cards, it is something like 10 seconds. On s/w RAID which most of these NAS units use, this could in theory easily be adjusted in software. However I think by default the mimic the values of h/w raid controllers. The problem is that after being marked as offline, you can put it back online and resync the array, but it is painful and the added load during the sync could cause another drive to be marked offline. And if the sync is not done, and if you were in something like a RAID 5, you would effectively lose your data.

So if there is an error, the drive would be allowed to do error recovery for about 7 seconds (value could be different depending on brand/implementation), after that, they return control to the RAID controller which would handle any error recovery.
Right, but my question was about the drive, not the RAID controller. What happens to the drive that supports TLER if it can't finish sector reallocation in the given 7 or so seconds? If you know. It has to finish it at some point. Does it do it in 7 second intervals? The only logical idea that comes to my mind.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 20, 2004
3736 posts
4141 upvotes
Montreal, QC
alpovs wrote: Right, but my question was about the drive, not the RAID controller. What happens to the drive that supports TLER if it can't finish sector reallocation in the given 7 or so seconds? If you know. It has to finish it at some point. Does it do it in 7 second intervals? The only logical idea that comes to my mind.
I think this post explains it nicely, so I won't paraphrase :)
https://community.wd.com/t/red-and-tler ... p/234921/3

So essentially, as I mentioned in my previous post "... if there is an error, the drive would be allowed to do error recovery for about 7 seconds (value could be different depending on brand/implementation), after that, they return control to the RAID controller which would handle any error recovery". But the post above goes into a little more of the details.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)