Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Failed Drive. replacing Vs. Re-seating

Occasional Visitor

Failed Drive. replacing Vs. Re-seating

For as long as I can remember, when we are alerted with a failed drive, the first step is to re-seat the drive. if the drive fails again, then we replace. That being said, the powers that be at my work want to replace as soon as an alert comes in.

Can someone please send me some valid information as to why re-seating 'before' replacing. If I am not mistaken, when we call to have the HD replaced, HP asks if we have re-seated first....do they not?

One last thing. Is there a possibility of an incorrect monitor perhaps, that is why the drive is shown as failed. Even when in the array utility it is showing as failed.

Sorry to make this so long, I am just trying to gather some information on reseating vs. replacing.

Thanks to all.
Honored Contributor

Re: Failed Drive. replacing Vs. Re-seating

If your drive is in a large array, replace it immediately.

If you have too many of these events, look for other causes, environmental stress (overheating), firmware upgrades.

I think reseating a drive is worth considering in these cases.

1. Trying to get a brand new drive to work and having problems with the connections.

2. Have a hung drive due to SCSI driver bugs. This was typical with older hardware and it is less common today.

3. You are working with small, non critical servers and hardware.

Monty Scrabeck
Occasional Visitor

Re: Failed Drive. replacing Vs. Re-seating

We recently had a drive show failed on our array. We got a replacement w/out reseating and the replacement drive came up failed as well. I called tech. support and they said to put the original back in and low and behold it recognized it and showed it as good (even though the physical hdd showed a red alarm light). Reseating the drive is more about the controllers view of the drive than it is about actual contact on the connectors.