3 ms·

It looks like the data does contain SMART 241, total LBAs written, for at least some drives. Someone with some time could correlate that to failure rate. My hy

• brianwski 4y ago
  > Someone with some time could correlate SMART data to failure rate. We looked into it a little, some notes written up here: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/what-smart-stats-indicate-hard-drive-failures/ https://www.backblaze.com/blog/what-smart-stats-indicate-har... Short summary is there are a few SMART stats that seem to predict failure way more than others, which is probably obvious. But we aren't PhDs in statistics and it isn't our area of focus, so.... This guy wrote a paper based on the Backblaze SMART data: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=bgsu1594957948648404&disposition=inline https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?acc... These 5 guys wrote another paper based on the Backblaze SMART data to train up a Bayesian network to predict failures: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8489097 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8489097 This is another article of predicting hard drive failures using the Backblaze SMART data: https://karthikna.github.io/Prediction-of-Hard-Drive-Failure/ https://karthikna.github.io/Prediction-of-Hard-Drive-Failure... I can't comment on their findings, but it's DEFINITELY an interesting thing to study now that we have almost 10 years of these drive stats across a pretty big drive farm.