Momentus XT, Momentus, Momentus Thin, MobileMax, and other notebook drives

[DKAIJ1]

During all my work with this issue, I have been in contact with Seagate Support and I appreciate Seagate is working on a solution, and for the record, case was initiated in April 2012. 

From Seagate I got this today, and I hope those guy's find a solution.

Mr.  Jensen,

An exact same model ST750XL003 is currently under testing in order to attempt a replication of the problem and a possible solution to what you are facing.  Again, in order to properly give support to your request, it will take more than the usual time to assess the problem, submit the problem to engineering and receive a solution.  I understand that you have been patient during the time that we have corresponded, and I appreciate it.  However, this is not an issue that is going to be solved quickly.  We have a lab where the testing will be made with a setup as similar as possible to your own.  We have not forgotten about this issue and we have not stopped working in trying to find a solution.

[fzabkar]

That's good news that Seagate is taking your concerns and test results seriously. Unfortunately I still can't see any attachment, neither with Opera nor with Firefox. I have also asked someone to access this thread with Internet Explorer, but he can't see any attachment either.

IIUC, you are saying that early motherboard chipsets exhibit the read errors while at least two recent chipsets do not. Wouldn't this suggest that the problem is somewhere in the SATA interface rather than the SSD?

As for the raw value of the SMART Raw Read Error Rate, this number represents a sector count, not an error count. I have attempted to explain Seagate's counterintuitive attributes here:

http://www.users.on.net/~fzabkar/HDD/Seagate_SER_RRER_HEC.html

FWIW, my own computer experience is very similar to yours. During my university days, my computer programs were input via punched cards. My early career was in mainframes, minis, and peripherals, including storage module drives such as Control Data's BK7 series. I have repaired thousands of different items of electronics, down to chip level. Whenever I'm faced with data corruption, I always try to directly compare expected data with actual data. Depending on their nature, the differences may point to a particular data bit, or to a particular memory cell, or they may suggest an addressing problem. It also helps to know whether the data errors are random, in which case one might suspect a serial communication problem rather than a problem with a parallel bus.

[DKAIJ1]

fzabkar - wrote: IIUC, you are saying that early motherboard chipsets exhibit the read errors while at least two recent chipsets do not. Wouldn't this suggest that the problem is somewhere in the SATA interface rather than the SSD?

As a test to troubleshoot SATA interface are causing those probelms or not in those primary computers 8730/xw4600.,

add on card with sata2 and sata3 have been tested with same hard/software setup 8730/xw4600. 

Since result was equal or very cloce , 99% of result was equal with sata 3, 100% with sata 2 

This show as you pointed, a clue to sata, so i did try with 3 other ordinary sata3 hdd in 8730/xw4600. setup, 

with and without ADD oncard, but no differances when a normal hdd with sata3 interface is used. 

I can then change OS, several boot with windows change to linux with several boot , and back to windows, 

and no errors in log about missing access to files or services. 

when using the ST750LX003 for a 5hours test in xw4600, counting files in a loop, as a test to find what causes missing file acces 

only 2 errors was counted, - and app 12  errors acces files are counted in boot where ssd is active after 6 boot in windows,

since chance in OS to linux boot twice in linux to clear ssd, and then back to windows, then 1 boot, no error acces files -

and then increasing in next 5 boot with windows.

those accessing files error in boot , could be interface or ssd,   maybee both combined. 

At least, windows in boot with ssd active become damaged after a while with ST750LX003 only. 

and similar in Linux - but it takes long times before error occure, and it is difficult to locate. 

Next 2-3 weeks I will be busy with other familystuff, so do not expect any reply. 

attachment: I  have tried with a new JPG picture, tell me about it next time. Error first time can be a simple format issue. 

since most of my time on internet like this forum is done from Linux, this time I did try Windows

[fzabkar]

I can see your latest attachment. :-)

[Mxlinks634]

DKAIJ1 - This thread was in July, as there been any more development with this issue or additional feedback from Seagate?

Thank you, paul

[DKAIJ1]

Hi , thanks for asking. 

No, my contact to Seagate did not provide me with any usable solutions yet-

but 1 times each month I send Seagate a reminder, and get a polite answer which tell they at working on my case. 

 I 

To help my own investigation - I bought  1 new item of ST750LX003 - and my test is still in progress - 

but as picture will show - Raw reading error is special.- not what  I do expect from a new hdd. 

 regards 

 Allan 

[DKAIJ1]

forgot the picture

[Mxlinks634]

Is your best guess that this is a firmware issue?   In practice, has it ever caused an OS to be un bootable for you?

[DKAIJ1]

Yes - my guess is this issue is caused by faulty Firmware. 

Just to confirm your question - system will not boot - yes - it has happend

in windows task scheduler  I did make a small script - 

after boot -

then copy a 100 K test text  file 1000 times  ( this let hdd buffer this file in SSD )

delete all  test text files

reboot in 120 seconds

after app 15 days time i got 1 computer wich tol me it would not boot cause by missing files in OS

--------

 when using  http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-revodrive-hybrid-pci-express-solid-state-drive.html 

in similar test - I did never discovered problems similar to what i have seen with ST750LX003  -

but this drive from OCZ is not practial to use en a laptop -. but the best to use in a workstation. 

Why seagate not have done anything yet to solve påroblem - to few people respond to errors in log file 

and anly later when drive dows not work caused by  other errors - nobody reads old logs. 

[fzabkar]

The raw value of the Raw Read Error Rate attribute represents a sector count, not an error count. Therefore it is pointless to keep monitoring these numbers. Instead you need to monitor the normalised value.

As I have attempted to explain in my tutorial, and as is evident from your graph, the drive reads 250 million sectors and records the total number of read errors. It then recalculates the normalised value, and the sector count rolls over to zero.

The normalised value is logarithmic. AIUI, a value of 120 represents a perfect score, ie zero errors. A value of 110 is equivalent to 10 errors, 100 equates to 100 errors, 90 equates to 1000 errors, and so on.