How to prevent bad sectors?How can I wipe my iPod classic and fix any bad sectors on the hard drive without killing it?Continuous scanning of hard disk for bad sectorsKingston SSD with several bad blocks and zero reallocated sectorsLaptop shuts after 5/10 seconds (sometimes) <del>(May be due to bad sectors in HDD)</del>Bad performance on Windows 7 with Bad sectorsHDD Bad sectors RegenerationWiping only part of a partition on an HDDFull formatting, HDD controllers, and bad-sector lockingHDD: lost partition table and bad sectors

Do any languages mark social distinctions other than gender and status?

When was the famous "sudo warning" introduced? Under what background? By whom?

Meaning of “Bulldog drooled courses through his jowls”

Have the US and Russia (or USSR before it) co-vetoed a UN resolution before today?

Tear in RFs, not losing air

Why it is a big deal whether or not Adam Schiff talked to the whistleblower?

A question about the Tannaka-Krein reconstruction of finite groups

Was Switzerland pressured either by Allies or Axis to take part in World War 2 at any time?

What plausible reasons why people forget they didn't originally live on this new planet?

What actually is "unallocated space"?

How come Aboriginal Australians didn't manage to raise their civilization levels to that of other continents?

Moving through the space of an invisible enemy creature in combat

Can I use Oko's ability targetting a creature with protection from green?

What are these objects near the Cosmonaut's faces?

Is it really better for the environment if I take the stairs as opposed to a lift?

Does Turkey make the "structural steel frame" for the F-35 fighter?

Is there a package that allows to write correctly times in hours, minutes and seconds in mathematical mode?

when to use がつ or げつ readings for 月?

Why did my relationship with my wife go down by two hearts?

Did the US push the Kurds to lower their defences against Turkey in the months preceding the latest Turkish military operation against them?

Prisoner's dilemma formulation for children

How would a race of humanoids with tails design [vehicle] seats?

How to deal with people whose priority is to not get blamed?

Stare long enough and you will have found the answer



How to prevent bad sectors?


How can I wipe my iPod classic and fix any bad sectors on the hard drive without killing it?Continuous scanning of hard disk for bad sectorsKingston SSD with several bad blocks and zero reallocated sectorsLaptop shuts after 5/10 seconds (sometimes) <del>(May be due to bad sectors in HDD)</del>Bad performance on Windows 7 with Bad sectorsHDD Bad sectors RegenerationWiping only part of a partition on an HDDFull formatting, HDD controllers, and bad-sector lockingHDD: lost partition table and bad sectors






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;









33

















I used to have bad sectors on my SSD about one month ago. I had fixed them through performing one level of zero formatting. However, after few days, when I was rechecking, I have found bad sectors again. Now, I am considering to wipe my drive again. Hence, taking backup, making drive free and losing data will be inevitable.



My question is, How can I prevent getting bad sectors again? And what is the best way in order to repair them?



Thanks in advance










share|improve this question





















  • 2





    There are two kinds of bad sectors; physically bad sectors, and logically bad sectors. Logically bad sectors can be repaired via LLF or tools like spinrite, but physically bad sectors cannot be repaired at all. Most of what I know about this is related to mechanical disks, so I don't want to lead you astray on SSDs, but generally speaking, bad sector count either remains stable, or grows quicker and quicker over time as the drive fails. watch the count. you may have the same number you previously had, and if it remains stable, you may be fine.

    – Frank Thomas
    May 26 at 8:27






  • 2





    Also, what tools are you using to check for bad sectors? I've been assuming that you are reading SMART data, which is written on a rom on the disk controller. SMART stats will not reset on a format, so far as I'm aware, so if it had noted reallocated or current pending sectors, they are still the same bad blocks you had from before the format. They are permanent. watch their count. if it rises, buy a new disk. I use Speedfan in windows, or gnome Disks in linux to check disk SMART stats.

    – Frank Thomas
    May 26 at 8:32






  • 17





    Don't "wipe" an SSD with zeroes like a rotational hard drive. This just wears the flash out faster, and does not actually zero all sectors of the flash. Use a secure erase utility or the vendor's utility to erase an SSD.

    – Michael Hampton
    May 27 at 3:02







  • 4





    @MichaelHampton Or just delete the encryption key. That is how modern large capacity drives do fast delete.

    – Aron
    May 27 at 7:30






  • 9





    Bad sectors appearing on an SSD are an indicator of imminent failure. Especially in conjunction with slowdowns. You will have to replace the drive - it may fail suddenly and completely.

    – pjc50
    May 27 at 8:18


















33

















I used to have bad sectors on my SSD about one month ago. I had fixed them through performing one level of zero formatting. However, after few days, when I was rechecking, I have found bad sectors again. Now, I am considering to wipe my drive again. Hence, taking backup, making drive free and losing data will be inevitable.



My question is, How can I prevent getting bad sectors again? And what is the best way in order to repair them?



Thanks in advance










share|improve this question





















  • 2





    There are two kinds of bad sectors; physically bad sectors, and logically bad sectors. Logically bad sectors can be repaired via LLF or tools like spinrite, but physically bad sectors cannot be repaired at all. Most of what I know about this is related to mechanical disks, so I don't want to lead you astray on SSDs, but generally speaking, bad sector count either remains stable, or grows quicker and quicker over time as the drive fails. watch the count. you may have the same number you previously had, and if it remains stable, you may be fine.

    – Frank Thomas
    May 26 at 8:27






  • 2





    Also, what tools are you using to check for bad sectors? I've been assuming that you are reading SMART data, which is written on a rom on the disk controller. SMART stats will not reset on a format, so far as I'm aware, so if it had noted reallocated or current pending sectors, they are still the same bad blocks you had from before the format. They are permanent. watch their count. if it rises, buy a new disk. I use Speedfan in windows, or gnome Disks in linux to check disk SMART stats.

    – Frank Thomas
    May 26 at 8:32






  • 17





    Don't "wipe" an SSD with zeroes like a rotational hard drive. This just wears the flash out faster, and does not actually zero all sectors of the flash. Use a secure erase utility or the vendor's utility to erase an SSD.

    – Michael Hampton
    May 27 at 3:02







  • 4





    @MichaelHampton Or just delete the encryption key. That is how modern large capacity drives do fast delete.

    – Aron
    May 27 at 7:30






  • 9





    Bad sectors appearing on an SSD are an indicator of imminent failure. Especially in conjunction with slowdowns. You will have to replace the drive - it may fail suddenly and completely.

    – pjc50
    May 27 at 8:18














33












33








33


10






I used to have bad sectors on my SSD about one month ago. I had fixed them through performing one level of zero formatting. However, after few days, when I was rechecking, I have found bad sectors again. Now, I am considering to wipe my drive again. Hence, taking backup, making drive free and losing data will be inevitable.



My question is, How can I prevent getting bad sectors again? And what is the best way in order to repair them?



Thanks in advance










share|improve this question















I used to have bad sectors on my SSD about one month ago. I had fixed them through performing one level of zero formatting. However, after few days, when I was rechecking, I have found bad sectors again. Now, I am considering to wipe my drive again. Hence, taking backup, making drive free and losing data will be inevitable.



My question is, How can I prevent getting bad sectors again? And what is the best way in order to repair them?



Thanks in advance







hard-drive ssd repair bad-sectors






share|improve this question














share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked May 26 at 7:17









Kaveh ShahhoseiniKaveh Shahhoseini

1792 silver badges7 bronze badges




1792 silver badges7 bronze badges










  • 2





    There are two kinds of bad sectors; physically bad sectors, and logically bad sectors. Logically bad sectors can be repaired via LLF or tools like spinrite, but physically bad sectors cannot be repaired at all. Most of what I know about this is related to mechanical disks, so I don't want to lead you astray on SSDs, but generally speaking, bad sector count either remains stable, or grows quicker and quicker over time as the drive fails. watch the count. you may have the same number you previously had, and if it remains stable, you may be fine.

    – Frank Thomas
    May 26 at 8:27






  • 2





    Also, what tools are you using to check for bad sectors? I've been assuming that you are reading SMART data, which is written on a rom on the disk controller. SMART stats will not reset on a format, so far as I'm aware, so if it had noted reallocated or current pending sectors, they are still the same bad blocks you had from before the format. They are permanent. watch their count. if it rises, buy a new disk. I use Speedfan in windows, or gnome Disks in linux to check disk SMART stats.

    – Frank Thomas
    May 26 at 8:32






  • 17





    Don't "wipe" an SSD with zeroes like a rotational hard drive. This just wears the flash out faster, and does not actually zero all sectors of the flash. Use a secure erase utility or the vendor's utility to erase an SSD.

    – Michael Hampton
    May 27 at 3:02







  • 4





    @MichaelHampton Or just delete the encryption key. That is how modern large capacity drives do fast delete.

    – Aron
    May 27 at 7:30






  • 9





    Bad sectors appearing on an SSD are an indicator of imminent failure. Especially in conjunction with slowdowns. You will have to replace the drive - it may fail suddenly and completely.

    – pjc50
    May 27 at 8:18













  • 2





    There are two kinds of bad sectors; physically bad sectors, and logically bad sectors. Logically bad sectors can be repaired via LLF or tools like spinrite, but physically bad sectors cannot be repaired at all. Most of what I know about this is related to mechanical disks, so I don't want to lead you astray on SSDs, but generally speaking, bad sector count either remains stable, or grows quicker and quicker over time as the drive fails. watch the count. you may have the same number you previously had, and if it remains stable, you may be fine.

    – Frank Thomas
    May 26 at 8:27






  • 2





    Also, what tools are you using to check for bad sectors? I've been assuming that you are reading SMART data, which is written on a rom on the disk controller. SMART stats will not reset on a format, so far as I'm aware, so if it had noted reallocated or current pending sectors, they are still the same bad blocks you had from before the format. They are permanent. watch their count. if it rises, buy a new disk. I use Speedfan in windows, or gnome Disks in linux to check disk SMART stats.

    – Frank Thomas
    May 26 at 8:32






  • 17





    Don't "wipe" an SSD with zeroes like a rotational hard drive. This just wears the flash out faster, and does not actually zero all sectors of the flash. Use a secure erase utility or the vendor's utility to erase an SSD.

    – Michael Hampton
    May 27 at 3:02







  • 4





    @MichaelHampton Or just delete the encryption key. That is how modern large capacity drives do fast delete.

    – Aron
    May 27 at 7:30






  • 9





    Bad sectors appearing on an SSD are an indicator of imminent failure. Especially in conjunction with slowdowns. You will have to replace the drive - it may fail suddenly and completely.

    – pjc50
    May 27 at 8:18








2




2





There are two kinds of bad sectors; physically bad sectors, and logically bad sectors. Logically bad sectors can be repaired via LLF or tools like spinrite, but physically bad sectors cannot be repaired at all. Most of what I know about this is related to mechanical disks, so I don't want to lead you astray on SSDs, but generally speaking, bad sector count either remains stable, or grows quicker and quicker over time as the drive fails. watch the count. you may have the same number you previously had, and if it remains stable, you may be fine.

– Frank Thomas
May 26 at 8:27





There are two kinds of bad sectors; physically bad sectors, and logically bad sectors. Logically bad sectors can be repaired via LLF or tools like spinrite, but physically bad sectors cannot be repaired at all. Most of what I know about this is related to mechanical disks, so I don't want to lead you astray on SSDs, but generally speaking, bad sector count either remains stable, or grows quicker and quicker over time as the drive fails. watch the count. you may have the same number you previously had, and if it remains stable, you may be fine.

– Frank Thomas
May 26 at 8:27




2




2





Also, what tools are you using to check for bad sectors? I've been assuming that you are reading SMART data, which is written on a rom on the disk controller. SMART stats will not reset on a format, so far as I'm aware, so if it had noted reallocated or current pending sectors, they are still the same bad blocks you had from before the format. They are permanent. watch their count. if it rises, buy a new disk. I use Speedfan in windows, or gnome Disks in linux to check disk SMART stats.

– Frank Thomas
May 26 at 8:32





Also, what tools are you using to check for bad sectors? I've been assuming that you are reading SMART data, which is written on a rom on the disk controller. SMART stats will not reset on a format, so far as I'm aware, so if it had noted reallocated or current pending sectors, they are still the same bad blocks you had from before the format. They are permanent. watch their count. if it rises, buy a new disk. I use Speedfan in windows, or gnome Disks in linux to check disk SMART stats.

– Frank Thomas
May 26 at 8:32




17




17





Don't "wipe" an SSD with zeroes like a rotational hard drive. This just wears the flash out faster, and does not actually zero all sectors of the flash. Use a secure erase utility or the vendor's utility to erase an SSD.

– Michael Hampton
May 27 at 3:02






Don't "wipe" an SSD with zeroes like a rotational hard drive. This just wears the flash out faster, and does not actually zero all sectors of the flash. Use a secure erase utility or the vendor's utility to erase an SSD.

– Michael Hampton
May 27 at 3:02





4




4





@MichaelHampton Or just delete the encryption key. That is how modern large capacity drives do fast delete.

– Aron
May 27 at 7:30





@MichaelHampton Or just delete the encryption key. That is how modern large capacity drives do fast delete.

– Aron
May 27 at 7:30




9




9





Bad sectors appearing on an SSD are an indicator of imminent failure. Especially in conjunction with slowdowns. You will have to replace the drive - it may fail suddenly and completely.

– pjc50
May 27 at 8:18






Bad sectors appearing on an SSD are an indicator of imminent failure. Especially in conjunction with slowdowns. You will have to replace the drive - it may fail suddenly and completely.

– pjc50
May 27 at 8:18











5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes


















88


















You can't prevent bad sectors.

If you reformat all you are doing is remapping around them, so they're no longer available for use.

They cannot be repaired & if they start to appear at an increasing rate, it's a good sign your drive is on its last legs, about to fail.

Backup & replace before that happens.. not after.






share|improve this answer























  • 23





    You should have a backup, regardless of the state of your drive. (And a strategy to recover from backups and to test the backups.)

    – Ismael Miguel
    May 26 at 22:42







  • 6





    If OP is reformatting either they already have a backup, or one is not required.

    – Phil
    May 26 at 23:20


















37


















First, as always, I'll start by saying storage is unpredictable and you should always have a backup.



Now, "bad sectors" behave quite differently on HDDs and SSDs, and have different common causes (and a very long tail end of uncommon but possible causes, hence the unpredictability). But in both cases, the suggested procedure is to replace the drive ASAP and either restore from backup or go for data recovery.



You can get quantitative data on drive status and impending failure by gathering S.M.A.R.T. data from the drive, using a tool like smartmontools/smartctl on Linux or CrystalDiskInfo (or gsmartctl) on Windows.




Most commonly, a series of bad sectors on a HDD suggests physical damage to the platter. This is often apparent in S.M.A.R.T. data as the "reallocated sectors count" goes up (the drive starts using its spare sectors) and "pending sector count" is above 0 (there are no spare good sectors left [!!!]). These tend to "spread"/"grow", i.e. the physical damage gets worse the more the drive tries to read it.



This is why the usual advice for bad sectors on a HDD is to replace ASAP, and sometimes this gets to the point of "stop using the drive; the only thing you should do on it is run a recovery tool like ddrescue because at this point remaining drive lifetime can be just a few hours or less, in the worst case.




A SSD is a different story. Each cell has limited "write endurance", and each write damages it slightly (very, very slightly). These are often rated in "TBW" (total bytes written) and "DWPD" (full drive writes per day, for its warrantied period usually 3-5 years). A high-quality drive can even be expected to exceed its rated writes without obvious adverse effects. This is often represented in S.M.A.R.T. data as a "media wearout indicator" or similar, and like a HDD, a SSD usually has extra cells it can use to replace a cell that has worn out.



If you're seeing "bad sectors" on a SSD, and the number seems to be increasing, it's likely that you've hit the point where the wearout is above the spare cells the SSD had (more likely on older or cheaper SSDs). With modern SSDs with wear-leveling, this means all cells are likely in a similar state, and, much like bad sectors on a HDD, this problem will only grow. And, much like a HDD, it is time to replace the drive.



Depending on the SSD size and age, it may also be worthwhile investigating what may be causing a large number of writes on your system: it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days.




tl;dr: Check S.M.A.R.T. data. Replace the drive. There is no recovery.






share|improve this answer




























  • "it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days" That is not true I see it frequently in consumer laptops that came with 4GB of ram from the factory and end users have installed SSD disks in them. And the older generation of SSD without good wear leveling are really bad about this. The M.2 disks should hopefully be a bit better.

    – Ted Mittelstaedt
    May 27 at 21:25



















6


















There are different kinds of bad sectors, and different causes. What you describe is of the "bad" kind.



While disks are expected to work mostly reliably, reality has it that bad sectors happen, especilly in adverse conditions, and towards the end of a device's lifetime. Drives will luckily, and unluckily, automatically remap bad sectors when they occur, you usually do not ever even notice unless you look at SMART info.



However, you did notice, which is bad. Because when a sector (or rather block, SSDs arrange sectors in larger blocks, and can physically only erase complete blocks) gets "bad", that normally means it cannot be erased and written to any more, but the data is still recoverable. The drive will covertly copy everything to a more healthy sector and will never tell you. SSDs do that all the time during normal operation anyway, this is called "wear levelling". So there is really no externally observable difference. But you did see a difference, and that's bad.

Either, this means the drive has already had so many failures that it has already run out of reserve sectors, or it cannot even read the sector any more, or the controller has a serious problem, or the whole thing is about to die. Or, whatever. In any case, no good.



Unrecoverable sectors are something that are generally considered to be "normal", although with a very, very low likelihood of occurring. Manufacturers say something like 1014 or 1015, but 1012 may be more realistic. Still...



Your mileage may vary, but I replace a disk when the first unrecoverable reads happen because on a healthy drive that kind of stuff just doesn't happen. Yeah, it's a "normal" thing, and it can (in theory) happen, but it doesn't happen. You can't trust a drive that has non-zero failures with your data.



You can somewhat mitigate that bad things will happen by having quality hardware and treating your hardware with respect. For the most part, that means no high temperatures, no electric "surprises" or other "harsh physical stuff". SSDs are much less sensible to "harsh physical stuff" than spinning disks, but they are not indestructible.



Fixing bad sectors (on any kind of disk) is an extremely stupid idea, only topped by overwriting a SSD with zeroes, which is even worse. Do not do that, ever.



What "fixing" bad sectors does is nothing but marking them as unreadable. The drive will remap the sector and thereafter never let you access that sector any more. That's as bad as it gets because often data can still be recovered when applying some patience. There are programs (like ddrescue) which copy partitions and re-read unreadable sectors a couple of hundred times in the hope that eventually a read succeeds. This takes forever but surprisingly it actually works! I've had to do it once a few years ago. However, after "fixing" bad sectors, you are out of luck. Your data is gone forever.

Zeroing a SSD will do two things. It will kill your data, and it will add one unnecessary complete erase-write cycle to every block. That's not what you want.



What you probably want to do is back up all data ASAP (if you haven't done that previously, which you should have done), then replace the drive.



Also, for the future you want to run an automated daily backup job. Yeah sure, only wusses do backups. But seriously, run an automated backup every evening, no exceptions. No, not once a week, every evening. If you have a weekly backup job because it's so annoying that it takes so long in the evening, you will have to rescue data (talking out of experience). Because when you back up weekly, it is guaranteed to happen that you get a failure 6 days after the last backup.



Before trashing the drive, be aware that your drive may not be guilty after all. I've had it happen some 7-8 years ago. The "expert" at the shop where I had my PC built talked me into buying a MSI board which was exactly as good as the ASUS board that I wanted (only, he probably had a better profit marge on that one).

So... stupid... fell for it, only to discover a week later that I got some corrupted files. Replaced disks, same problem. Eventually got a few bluescreens, ran memtest. Every now and then, once per hour or so, it would show a randomly occurring memory error. Had all RAM replaced, no avail. End of story: The mainboard wasn't compatible with the RAM.

Bottom line: It probably is the disk's fault, but not necessarily so.






share|improve this answer


























  • The 10^-14 to 10^-15 URE rate is (in every case I've seen) quoted in terms of full sector errors per bits read. A value of 10^-12 would mean that for every 10^12 bits read, statistically you'd expect to see a full sector (4 KiB) read failure. That's 4 KiB in about 10^2 GiB (100 GiB) read. If that were the case, you could expect a single read pass over the contents of a reasonably-sized drive to come back with a few bad sectors. I doubt even the cheapskate SSDs are that bad.

    – a CVn
    May 28 at 13:57


















3


















There are 2 ways to REDUCE the formation of bad sectors in a computer:



1) Increase the amount of physical ram. With a modern operating system when it runs out of physical memory it will page out ram to the disk. This paging process is very disk intensive and it will destroy your SSD quickly.



Under Windows 10 run the program "Resource Monitor" and check the Memory tab. If you don't have at least 50% ram allocated to "free & standby" then you probably don't have enough. As a rule of thumb windows 10 desktop systems need around 16GB of ram to minimize paging. With magnetic media you can get away with 8GB of ram because the magnetic media isn't "worn out" by paging. I think it's absolutely disgusting that computer sellers still sell devices with 4GB of ram in them but this industry has a lot of scammers in it.



Some people with SSDs delete their paging file by going into Control Panel, System, Advanced System Settings, Settings, Advanced and changing it but I do not recommend this as if the system artificially runs out of swap space things will crash. And some Linux distros will crash without swap. Linux and I believe windows move seldom-used ram to swap to free up main ram for caching which speeds up the system



I WOULD NOT run a swapless desktop or laptop with anything less than 32GB of ram.



2) Add a small magnetic media disk (assuming you have a desktop) and move the swap to there.



Your problem is very common with people who DO NOT UNDERSTAND computer performance. A common trick these days is to shove a too small SSD disk in a laptop with inadequate ram and then the salesman can demo the laptop booting up super fast and that gives the tech-wanna-be wet dreams in the store so they run out the door with the thing under their arm.



There is NO substitute for increasing main core ram to speed up a computer. Yes it is much more expensive than an el-cheapo 256GB SSD but true speed costs money whether it's a car or a computer. A $5 fa rt can doesn't make a car go any faster anymore than a cheap SSD with inadequate core ram makes a computer go any faster.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    Welcome to Super User Ted. Thank you for your answer, but can you edit it and add some citations for the claims you are making? Cheers

    – bertieb
    May 28 at 0:20


















0


















SSD's are rated in wear cycles. This means that the more writes to the SSD the further along you are in using up the total number of wear cycles on the SSD



When main ram is overcommitted, the machine pages out to the swap file. This creates additional writes than would otherwise happen if the main ram was not overcommitted.



Therefore one way to REDUCE writing to an SSD on a "regular PC" WITHOUT just turning it off or reducing use of it, is to reduce paging on it - reduce use of the swapfile.



Increasing main ram decreases use of the swapfile because there are fewer writes to the swapfile.



Unused main ram is allocated to the disk cache so even if the machine is NEVER overcomitted on ram (highly unusual for an average desktop) increasing the disk cache will also reduce writes to the SSD






share|improve this answer





























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "3"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );














    draft saved

    draft discarded
















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1441306%2fhow-to-prevent-bad-sectors%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown


























    5 Answers
    5






    active

    oldest

    votes








    5 Answers
    5






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    88


















    You can't prevent bad sectors.

    If you reformat all you are doing is remapping around them, so they're no longer available for use.

    They cannot be repaired & if they start to appear at an increasing rate, it's a good sign your drive is on its last legs, about to fail.

    Backup & replace before that happens.. not after.






    share|improve this answer























    • 23





      You should have a backup, regardless of the state of your drive. (And a strategy to recover from backups and to test the backups.)

      – Ismael Miguel
      May 26 at 22:42







    • 6





      If OP is reformatting either they already have a backup, or one is not required.

      – Phil
      May 26 at 23:20















    88


















    You can't prevent bad sectors.

    If you reformat all you are doing is remapping around them, so they're no longer available for use.

    They cannot be repaired & if they start to appear at an increasing rate, it's a good sign your drive is on its last legs, about to fail.

    Backup & replace before that happens.. not after.






    share|improve this answer























    • 23





      You should have a backup, regardless of the state of your drive. (And a strategy to recover from backups and to test the backups.)

      – Ismael Miguel
      May 26 at 22:42







    • 6





      If OP is reformatting either they already have a backup, or one is not required.

      – Phil
      May 26 at 23:20













    88














    88










    88









    You can't prevent bad sectors.

    If you reformat all you are doing is remapping around them, so they're no longer available for use.

    They cannot be repaired & if they start to appear at an increasing rate, it's a good sign your drive is on its last legs, about to fail.

    Backup & replace before that happens.. not after.






    share|improve this answer
















    You can't prevent bad sectors.

    If you reformat all you are doing is remapping around them, so they're no longer available for use.

    They cannot be repaired & if they start to appear at an increasing rate, it's a good sign your drive is on its last legs, about to fail.

    Backup & replace before that happens.. not after.







    share|improve this answer















    share|improve this answer




    share|improve this answer








    edited May 28 at 4:21

























    answered May 26 at 8:27









    TetsujinTetsujin

    20k6 gold badges45 silver badges74 bronze badges




    20k6 gold badges45 silver badges74 bronze badges










    • 23





      You should have a backup, regardless of the state of your drive. (And a strategy to recover from backups and to test the backups.)

      – Ismael Miguel
      May 26 at 22:42







    • 6





      If OP is reformatting either they already have a backup, or one is not required.

      – Phil
      May 26 at 23:20












    • 23





      You should have a backup, regardless of the state of your drive. (And a strategy to recover from backups and to test the backups.)

      – Ismael Miguel
      May 26 at 22:42







    • 6





      If OP is reformatting either they already have a backup, or one is not required.

      – Phil
      May 26 at 23:20







    23




    23





    You should have a backup, regardless of the state of your drive. (And a strategy to recover from backups and to test the backups.)

    – Ismael Miguel
    May 26 at 22:42






    You should have a backup, regardless of the state of your drive. (And a strategy to recover from backups and to test the backups.)

    – Ismael Miguel
    May 26 at 22:42





    6




    6





    If OP is reformatting either they already have a backup, or one is not required.

    – Phil
    May 26 at 23:20





    If OP is reformatting either they already have a backup, or one is not required.

    – Phil
    May 26 at 23:20













    37


















    First, as always, I'll start by saying storage is unpredictable and you should always have a backup.



    Now, "bad sectors" behave quite differently on HDDs and SSDs, and have different common causes (and a very long tail end of uncommon but possible causes, hence the unpredictability). But in both cases, the suggested procedure is to replace the drive ASAP and either restore from backup or go for data recovery.



    You can get quantitative data on drive status and impending failure by gathering S.M.A.R.T. data from the drive, using a tool like smartmontools/smartctl on Linux or CrystalDiskInfo (or gsmartctl) on Windows.




    Most commonly, a series of bad sectors on a HDD suggests physical damage to the platter. This is often apparent in S.M.A.R.T. data as the "reallocated sectors count" goes up (the drive starts using its spare sectors) and "pending sector count" is above 0 (there are no spare good sectors left [!!!]). These tend to "spread"/"grow", i.e. the physical damage gets worse the more the drive tries to read it.



    This is why the usual advice for bad sectors on a HDD is to replace ASAP, and sometimes this gets to the point of "stop using the drive; the only thing you should do on it is run a recovery tool like ddrescue because at this point remaining drive lifetime can be just a few hours or less, in the worst case.




    A SSD is a different story. Each cell has limited "write endurance", and each write damages it slightly (very, very slightly). These are often rated in "TBW" (total bytes written) and "DWPD" (full drive writes per day, for its warrantied period usually 3-5 years). A high-quality drive can even be expected to exceed its rated writes without obvious adverse effects. This is often represented in S.M.A.R.T. data as a "media wearout indicator" or similar, and like a HDD, a SSD usually has extra cells it can use to replace a cell that has worn out.



    If you're seeing "bad sectors" on a SSD, and the number seems to be increasing, it's likely that you've hit the point where the wearout is above the spare cells the SSD had (more likely on older or cheaper SSDs). With modern SSDs with wear-leveling, this means all cells are likely in a similar state, and, much like bad sectors on a HDD, this problem will only grow. And, much like a HDD, it is time to replace the drive.



    Depending on the SSD size and age, it may also be worthwhile investigating what may be causing a large number of writes on your system: it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days.




    tl;dr: Check S.M.A.R.T. data. Replace the drive. There is no recovery.






    share|improve this answer




























    • "it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days" That is not true I see it frequently in consumer laptops that came with 4GB of ram from the factory and end users have installed SSD disks in them. And the older generation of SSD without good wear leveling are really bad about this. The M.2 disks should hopefully be a bit better.

      – Ted Mittelstaedt
      May 27 at 21:25
















    37


















    First, as always, I'll start by saying storage is unpredictable and you should always have a backup.



    Now, "bad sectors" behave quite differently on HDDs and SSDs, and have different common causes (and a very long tail end of uncommon but possible causes, hence the unpredictability). But in both cases, the suggested procedure is to replace the drive ASAP and either restore from backup or go for data recovery.



    You can get quantitative data on drive status and impending failure by gathering S.M.A.R.T. data from the drive, using a tool like smartmontools/smartctl on Linux or CrystalDiskInfo (or gsmartctl) on Windows.




    Most commonly, a series of bad sectors on a HDD suggests physical damage to the platter. This is often apparent in S.M.A.R.T. data as the "reallocated sectors count" goes up (the drive starts using its spare sectors) and "pending sector count" is above 0 (there are no spare good sectors left [!!!]). These tend to "spread"/"grow", i.e. the physical damage gets worse the more the drive tries to read it.



    This is why the usual advice for bad sectors on a HDD is to replace ASAP, and sometimes this gets to the point of "stop using the drive; the only thing you should do on it is run a recovery tool like ddrescue because at this point remaining drive lifetime can be just a few hours or less, in the worst case.




    A SSD is a different story. Each cell has limited "write endurance", and each write damages it slightly (very, very slightly). These are often rated in "TBW" (total bytes written) and "DWPD" (full drive writes per day, for its warrantied period usually 3-5 years). A high-quality drive can even be expected to exceed its rated writes without obvious adverse effects. This is often represented in S.M.A.R.T. data as a "media wearout indicator" or similar, and like a HDD, a SSD usually has extra cells it can use to replace a cell that has worn out.



    If you're seeing "bad sectors" on a SSD, and the number seems to be increasing, it's likely that you've hit the point where the wearout is above the spare cells the SSD had (more likely on older or cheaper SSDs). With modern SSDs with wear-leveling, this means all cells are likely in a similar state, and, much like bad sectors on a HDD, this problem will only grow. And, much like a HDD, it is time to replace the drive.



    Depending on the SSD size and age, it may also be worthwhile investigating what may be causing a large number of writes on your system: it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days.




    tl;dr: Check S.M.A.R.T. data. Replace the drive. There is no recovery.






    share|improve this answer




























    • "it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days" That is not true I see it frequently in consumer laptops that came with 4GB of ram from the factory and end users have installed SSD disks in them. And the older generation of SSD without good wear leveling are really bad about this. The M.2 disks should hopefully be a bit better.

      – Ted Mittelstaedt
      May 27 at 21:25














    37














    37










    37









    First, as always, I'll start by saying storage is unpredictable and you should always have a backup.



    Now, "bad sectors" behave quite differently on HDDs and SSDs, and have different common causes (and a very long tail end of uncommon but possible causes, hence the unpredictability). But in both cases, the suggested procedure is to replace the drive ASAP and either restore from backup or go for data recovery.



    You can get quantitative data on drive status and impending failure by gathering S.M.A.R.T. data from the drive, using a tool like smartmontools/smartctl on Linux or CrystalDiskInfo (or gsmartctl) on Windows.




    Most commonly, a series of bad sectors on a HDD suggests physical damage to the platter. This is often apparent in S.M.A.R.T. data as the "reallocated sectors count" goes up (the drive starts using its spare sectors) and "pending sector count" is above 0 (there are no spare good sectors left [!!!]). These tend to "spread"/"grow", i.e. the physical damage gets worse the more the drive tries to read it.



    This is why the usual advice for bad sectors on a HDD is to replace ASAP, and sometimes this gets to the point of "stop using the drive; the only thing you should do on it is run a recovery tool like ddrescue because at this point remaining drive lifetime can be just a few hours or less, in the worst case.




    A SSD is a different story. Each cell has limited "write endurance", and each write damages it slightly (very, very slightly). These are often rated in "TBW" (total bytes written) and "DWPD" (full drive writes per day, for its warrantied period usually 3-5 years). A high-quality drive can even be expected to exceed its rated writes without obvious adverse effects. This is often represented in S.M.A.R.T. data as a "media wearout indicator" or similar, and like a HDD, a SSD usually has extra cells it can use to replace a cell that has worn out.



    If you're seeing "bad sectors" on a SSD, and the number seems to be increasing, it's likely that you've hit the point where the wearout is above the spare cells the SSD had (more likely on older or cheaper SSDs). With modern SSDs with wear-leveling, this means all cells are likely in a similar state, and, much like bad sectors on a HDD, this problem will only grow. And, much like a HDD, it is time to replace the drive.



    Depending on the SSD size and age, it may also be worthwhile investigating what may be causing a large number of writes on your system: it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days.




    tl;dr: Check S.M.A.R.T. data. Replace the drive. There is no recovery.






    share|improve this answer
















    First, as always, I'll start by saying storage is unpredictable and you should always have a backup.



    Now, "bad sectors" behave quite differently on HDDs and SSDs, and have different common causes (and a very long tail end of uncommon but possible causes, hence the unpredictability). But in both cases, the suggested procedure is to replace the drive ASAP and either restore from backup or go for data recovery.



    You can get quantitative data on drive status and impending failure by gathering S.M.A.R.T. data from the drive, using a tool like smartmontools/smartctl on Linux or CrystalDiskInfo (or gsmartctl) on Windows.




    Most commonly, a series of bad sectors on a HDD suggests physical damage to the platter. This is often apparent in S.M.A.R.T. data as the "reallocated sectors count" goes up (the drive starts using its spare sectors) and "pending sector count" is above 0 (there are no spare good sectors left [!!!]). These tend to "spread"/"grow", i.e. the physical damage gets worse the more the drive tries to read it.



    This is why the usual advice for bad sectors on a HDD is to replace ASAP, and sometimes this gets to the point of "stop using the drive; the only thing you should do on it is run a recovery tool like ddrescue because at this point remaining drive lifetime can be just a few hours or less, in the worst case.




    A SSD is a different story. Each cell has limited "write endurance", and each write damages it slightly (very, very slightly). These are often rated in "TBW" (total bytes written) and "DWPD" (full drive writes per day, for its warrantied period usually 3-5 years). A high-quality drive can even be expected to exceed its rated writes without obvious adverse effects. This is often represented in S.M.A.R.T. data as a "media wearout indicator" or similar, and like a HDD, a SSD usually has extra cells it can use to replace a cell that has worn out.



    If you're seeing "bad sectors" on a SSD, and the number seems to be increasing, it's likely that you've hit the point where the wearout is above the spare cells the SSD had (more likely on older or cheaper SSDs). With modern SSDs with wear-leveling, this means all cells are likely in a similar state, and, much like bad sectors on a HDD, this problem will only grow. And, much like a HDD, it is time to replace the drive.



    Depending on the SSD size and age, it may also be worthwhile investigating what may be causing a large number of writes on your system: it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days.




    tl;dr: Check S.M.A.R.T. data. Replace the drive. There is no recovery.







    share|improve this answer















    share|improve this answer




    share|improve this answer








    edited May 29 at 2:24

























    answered May 27 at 0:45









    BobBob

    49.1k20 gold badges148 silver badges180 bronze badges




    49.1k20 gold badges148 silver badges180 bronze badges















    • "it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days" That is not true I see it frequently in consumer laptops that came with 4GB of ram from the factory and end users have installed SSD disks in them. And the older generation of SSD without good wear leveling are really bad about this. The M.2 disks should hopefully be a bit better.

      – Ted Mittelstaedt
      May 27 at 21:25


















    • "it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days" That is not true I see it frequently in consumer laptops that came with 4GB of ram from the factory and end users have installed SSD disks in them. And the older generation of SSD without good wear leveling are really bad about this. The M.2 disks should hopefully be a bit better.

      – Ted Mittelstaedt
      May 27 at 21:25

















    "it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days" That is not true I see it frequently in consumer laptops that came with 4GB of ram from the factory and end users have installed SSD disks in them. And the older generation of SSD without good wear leveling are really bad about this. The M.2 disks should hopefully be a bit better.

    – Ted Mittelstaedt
    May 27 at 21:25






    "it's rare for a SSD in consumer use to actually wear out these days" That is not true I see it frequently in consumer laptops that came with 4GB of ram from the factory and end users have installed SSD disks in them. And the older generation of SSD without good wear leveling are really bad about this. The M.2 disks should hopefully be a bit better.

    – Ted Mittelstaedt
    May 27 at 21:25












    6


















    There are different kinds of bad sectors, and different causes. What you describe is of the "bad" kind.



    While disks are expected to work mostly reliably, reality has it that bad sectors happen, especilly in adverse conditions, and towards the end of a device's lifetime. Drives will luckily, and unluckily, automatically remap bad sectors when they occur, you usually do not ever even notice unless you look at SMART info.



    However, you did notice, which is bad. Because when a sector (or rather block, SSDs arrange sectors in larger blocks, and can physically only erase complete blocks) gets "bad", that normally means it cannot be erased and written to any more, but the data is still recoverable. The drive will covertly copy everything to a more healthy sector and will never tell you. SSDs do that all the time during normal operation anyway, this is called "wear levelling". So there is really no externally observable difference. But you did see a difference, and that's bad.

    Either, this means the drive has already had so many failures that it has already run out of reserve sectors, or it cannot even read the sector any more, or the controller has a serious problem, or the whole thing is about to die. Or, whatever. In any case, no good.



    Unrecoverable sectors are something that are generally considered to be "normal", although with a very, very low likelihood of occurring. Manufacturers say something like 1014 or 1015, but 1012 may be more realistic. Still...



    Your mileage may vary, but I replace a disk when the first unrecoverable reads happen because on a healthy drive that kind of stuff just doesn't happen. Yeah, it's a "normal" thing, and it can (in theory) happen, but it doesn't happen. You can't trust a drive that has non-zero failures with your data.



    You can somewhat mitigate that bad things will happen by having quality hardware and treating your hardware with respect. For the most part, that means no high temperatures, no electric "surprises" or other "harsh physical stuff". SSDs are much less sensible to "harsh physical stuff" than spinning disks, but they are not indestructible.



    Fixing bad sectors (on any kind of disk) is an extremely stupid idea, only topped by overwriting a SSD with zeroes, which is even worse. Do not do that, ever.



    What "fixing" bad sectors does is nothing but marking them as unreadable. The drive will remap the sector and thereafter never let you access that sector any more. That's as bad as it gets because often data can still be recovered when applying some patience. There are programs (like ddrescue) which copy partitions and re-read unreadable sectors a couple of hundred times in the hope that eventually a read succeeds. This takes forever but surprisingly it actually works! I've had to do it once a few years ago. However, after "fixing" bad sectors, you are out of luck. Your data is gone forever.

    Zeroing a SSD will do two things. It will kill your data, and it will add one unnecessary complete erase-write cycle to every block. That's not what you want.



    What you probably want to do is back up all data ASAP (if you haven't done that previously, which you should have done), then replace the drive.



    Also, for the future you want to run an automated daily backup job. Yeah sure, only wusses do backups. But seriously, run an automated backup every evening, no exceptions. No, not once a week, every evening. If you have a weekly backup job because it's so annoying that it takes so long in the evening, you will have to rescue data (talking out of experience). Because when you back up weekly, it is guaranteed to happen that you get a failure 6 days after the last backup.



    Before trashing the drive, be aware that your drive may not be guilty after all. I've had it happen some 7-8 years ago. The "expert" at the shop where I had my PC built talked me into buying a MSI board which was exactly as good as the ASUS board that I wanted (only, he probably had a better profit marge on that one).

    So... stupid... fell for it, only to discover a week later that I got some corrupted files. Replaced disks, same problem. Eventually got a few bluescreens, ran memtest. Every now and then, once per hour or so, it would show a randomly occurring memory error. Had all RAM replaced, no avail. End of story: The mainboard wasn't compatible with the RAM.

    Bottom line: It probably is the disk's fault, but not necessarily so.






    share|improve this answer


























    • The 10^-14 to 10^-15 URE rate is (in every case I've seen) quoted in terms of full sector errors per bits read. A value of 10^-12 would mean that for every 10^12 bits read, statistically you'd expect to see a full sector (4 KiB) read failure. That's 4 KiB in about 10^2 GiB (100 GiB) read. If that were the case, you could expect a single read pass over the contents of a reasonably-sized drive to come back with a few bad sectors. I doubt even the cheapskate SSDs are that bad.

      – a CVn
      May 28 at 13:57















    6


















    There are different kinds of bad sectors, and different causes. What you describe is of the "bad" kind.



    While disks are expected to work mostly reliably, reality has it that bad sectors happen, especilly in adverse conditions, and towards the end of a device's lifetime. Drives will luckily, and unluckily, automatically remap bad sectors when they occur, you usually do not ever even notice unless you look at SMART info.



    However, you did notice, which is bad. Because when a sector (or rather block, SSDs arrange sectors in larger blocks, and can physically only erase complete blocks) gets "bad", that normally means it cannot be erased and written to any more, but the data is still recoverable. The drive will covertly copy everything to a more healthy sector and will never tell you. SSDs do that all the time during normal operation anyway, this is called "wear levelling". So there is really no externally observable difference. But you did see a difference, and that's bad.

    Either, this means the drive has already had so many failures that it has already run out of reserve sectors, or it cannot even read the sector any more, or the controller has a serious problem, or the whole thing is about to die. Or, whatever. In any case, no good.



    Unrecoverable sectors are something that are generally considered to be "normal", although with a very, very low likelihood of occurring. Manufacturers say something like 1014 or 1015, but 1012 may be more realistic. Still...



    Your mileage may vary, but I replace a disk when the first unrecoverable reads happen because on a healthy drive that kind of stuff just doesn't happen. Yeah, it's a "normal" thing, and it can (in theory) happen, but it doesn't happen. You can't trust a drive that has non-zero failures with your data.



    You can somewhat mitigate that bad things will happen by having quality hardware and treating your hardware with respect. For the most part, that means no high temperatures, no electric "surprises" or other "harsh physical stuff". SSDs are much less sensible to "harsh physical stuff" than spinning disks, but they are not indestructible.



    Fixing bad sectors (on any kind of disk) is an extremely stupid idea, only topped by overwriting a SSD with zeroes, which is even worse. Do not do that, ever.



    What "fixing" bad sectors does is nothing but marking them as unreadable. The drive will remap the sector and thereafter never let you access that sector any more. That's as bad as it gets because often data can still be recovered when applying some patience. There are programs (like ddrescue) which copy partitions and re-read unreadable sectors a couple of hundred times in the hope that eventually a read succeeds. This takes forever but surprisingly it actually works! I've had to do it once a few years ago. However, after "fixing" bad sectors, you are out of luck. Your data is gone forever.

    Zeroing a SSD will do two things. It will kill your data, and it will add one unnecessary complete erase-write cycle to every block. That's not what you want.



    What you probably want to do is back up all data ASAP (if you haven't done that previously, which you should have done), then replace the drive.



    Also, for the future you want to run an automated daily backup job. Yeah sure, only wusses do backups. But seriously, run an automated backup every evening, no exceptions. No, not once a week, every evening. If you have a weekly backup job because it's so annoying that it takes so long in the evening, you will have to rescue data (talking out of experience). Because when you back up weekly, it is guaranteed to happen that you get a failure 6 days after the last backup.



    Before trashing the drive, be aware that your drive may not be guilty after all. I've had it happen some 7-8 years ago. The "expert" at the shop where I had my PC built talked me into buying a MSI board which was exactly as good as the ASUS board that I wanted (only, he probably had a better profit marge on that one).

    So... stupid... fell for it, only to discover a week later that I got some corrupted files. Replaced disks, same problem. Eventually got a few bluescreens, ran memtest. Every now and then, once per hour or so, it would show a randomly occurring memory error. Had all RAM replaced, no avail. End of story: The mainboard wasn't compatible with the RAM.

    Bottom line: It probably is the disk's fault, but not necessarily so.






    share|improve this answer


























    • The 10^-14 to 10^-15 URE rate is (in every case I've seen) quoted in terms of full sector errors per bits read. A value of 10^-12 would mean that for every 10^12 bits read, statistically you'd expect to see a full sector (4 KiB) read failure. That's 4 KiB in about 10^2 GiB (100 GiB) read. If that were the case, you could expect a single read pass over the contents of a reasonably-sized drive to come back with a few bad sectors. I doubt even the cheapskate SSDs are that bad.

      – a CVn
      May 28 at 13:57













    6














    6










    6









    There are different kinds of bad sectors, and different causes. What you describe is of the "bad" kind.



    While disks are expected to work mostly reliably, reality has it that bad sectors happen, especilly in adverse conditions, and towards the end of a device's lifetime. Drives will luckily, and unluckily, automatically remap bad sectors when they occur, you usually do not ever even notice unless you look at SMART info.



    However, you did notice, which is bad. Because when a sector (or rather block, SSDs arrange sectors in larger blocks, and can physically only erase complete blocks) gets "bad", that normally means it cannot be erased and written to any more, but the data is still recoverable. The drive will covertly copy everything to a more healthy sector and will never tell you. SSDs do that all the time during normal operation anyway, this is called "wear levelling". So there is really no externally observable difference. But you did see a difference, and that's bad.

    Either, this means the drive has already had so many failures that it has already run out of reserve sectors, or it cannot even read the sector any more, or the controller has a serious problem, or the whole thing is about to die. Or, whatever. In any case, no good.



    Unrecoverable sectors are something that are generally considered to be "normal", although with a very, very low likelihood of occurring. Manufacturers say something like 1014 or 1015, but 1012 may be more realistic. Still...



    Your mileage may vary, but I replace a disk when the first unrecoverable reads happen because on a healthy drive that kind of stuff just doesn't happen. Yeah, it's a "normal" thing, and it can (in theory) happen, but it doesn't happen. You can't trust a drive that has non-zero failures with your data.



    You can somewhat mitigate that bad things will happen by having quality hardware and treating your hardware with respect. For the most part, that means no high temperatures, no electric "surprises" or other "harsh physical stuff". SSDs are much less sensible to "harsh physical stuff" than spinning disks, but they are not indestructible.



    Fixing bad sectors (on any kind of disk) is an extremely stupid idea, only topped by overwriting a SSD with zeroes, which is even worse. Do not do that, ever.



    What "fixing" bad sectors does is nothing but marking them as unreadable. The drive will remap the sector and thereafter never let you access that sector any more. That's as bad as it gets because often data can still be recovered when applying some patience. There are programs (like ddrescue) which copy partitions and re-read unreadable sectors a couple of hundred times in the hope that eventually a read succeeds. This takes forever but surprisingly it actually works! I've had to do it once a few years ago. However, after "fixing" bad sectors, you are out of luck. Your data is gone forever.

    Zeroing a SSD will do two things. It will kill your data, and it will add one unnecessary complete erase-write cycle to every block. That's not what you want.



    What you probably want to do is back up all data ASAP (if you haven't done that previously, which you should have done), then replace the drive.



    Also, for the future you want to run an automated daily backup job. Yeah sure, only wusses do backups. But seriously, run an automated backup every evening, no exceptions. No, not once a week, every evening. If you have a weekly backup job because it's so annoying that it takes so long in the evening, you will have to rescue data (talking out of experience). Because when you back up weekly, it is guaranteed to happen that you get a failure 6 days after the last backup.



    Before trashing the drive, be aware that your drive may not be guilty after all. I've had it happen some 7-8 years ago. The "expert" at the shop where I had my PC built talked me into buying a MSI board which was exactly as good as the ASUS board that I wanted (only, he probably had a better profit marge on that one).

    So... stupid... fell for it, only to discover a week later that I got some corrupted files. Replaced disks, same problem. Eventually got a few bluescreens, ran memtest. Every now and then, once per hour or so, it would show a randomly occurring memory error. Had all RAM replaced, no avail. End of story: The mainboard wasn't compatible with the RAM.

    Bottom line: It probably is the disk's fault, but not necessarily so.






    share|improve this answer














    There are different kinds of bad sectors, and different causes. What you describe is of the "bad" kind.



    While disks are expected to work mostly reliably, reality has it that bad sectors happen, especilly in adverse conditions, and towards the end of a device's lifetime. Drives will luckily, and unluckily, automatically remap bad sectors when they occur, you usually do not ever even notice unless you look at SMART info.



    However, you did notice, which is bad. Because when a sector (or rather block, SSDs arrange sectors in larger blocks, and can physically only erase complete blocks) gets "bad", that normally means it cannot be erased and written to any more, but the data is still recoverable. The drive will covertly copy everything to a more healthy sector and will never tell you. SSDs do that all the time during normal operation anyway, this is called "wear levelling". So there is really no externally observable difference. But you did see a difference, and that's bad.

    Either, this means the drive has already had so many failures that it has already run out of reserve sectors, or it cannot even read the sector any more, or the controller has a serious problem, or the whole thing is about to die. Or, whatever. In any case, no good.



    Unrecoverable sectors are something that are generally considered to be "normal", although with a very, very low likelihood of occurring. Manufacturers say something like 1014 or 1015, but 1012 may be more realistic. Still...



    Your mileage may vary, but I replace a disk when the first unrecoverable reads happen because on a healthy drive that kind of stuff just doesn't happen. Yeah, it's a "normal" thing, and it can (in theory) happen, but it doesn't happen. You can't trust a drive that has non-zero failures with your data.



    You can somewhat mitigate that bad things will happen by having quality hardware and treating your hardware with respect. For the most part, that means no high temperatures, no electric "surprises" or other "harsh physical stuff". SSDs are much less sensible to "harsh physical stuff" than spinning disks, but they are not indestructible.



    Fixing bad sectors (on any kind of disk) is an extremely stupid idea, only topped by overwriting a SSD with zeroes, which is even worse. Do not do that, ever.



    What "fixing" bad sectors does is nothing but marking them as unreadable. The drive will remap the sector and thereafter never let you access that sector any more. That's as bad as it gets because often data can still be recovered when applying some patience. There are programs (like ddrescue) which copy partitions and re-read unreadable sectors a couple of hundred times in the hope that eventually a read succeeds. This takes forever but surprisingly it actually works! I've had to do it once a few years ago. However, after "fixing" bad sectors, you are out of luck. Your data is gone forever.

    Zeroing a SSD will do two things. It will kill your data, and it will add one unnecessary complete erase-write cycle to every block. That's not what you want.



    What you probably want to do is back up all data ASAP (if you haven't done that previously, which you should have done), then replace the drive.



    Also, for the future you want to run an automated daily backup job. Yeah sure, only wusses do backups. But seriously, run an automated backup every evening, no exceptions. No, not once a week, every evening. If you have a weekly backup job because it's so annoying that it takes so long in the evening, you will have to rescue data (talking out of experience). Because when you back up weekly, it is guaranteed to happen that you get a failure 6 days after the last backup.



    Before trashing the drive, be aware that your drive may not be guilty after all. I've had it happen some 7-8 years ago. The "expert" at the shop where I had my PC built talked me into buying a MSI board which was exactly as good as the ASUS board that I wanted (only, he probably had a better profit marge on that one).

    So... stupid... fell for it, only to discover a week later that I got some corrupted files. Replaced disks, same problem. Eventually got a few bluescreens, ran memtest. Every now and then, once per hour or so, it would show a randomly occurring memory error. Had all RAM replaced, no avail. End of story: The mainboard wasn't compatible with the RAM.

    Bottom line: It probably is the disk's fault, but not necessarily so.







    share|improve this answer













    share|improve this answer




    share|improve this answer










    answered May 27 at 11:45









    DamonDamon

    3,7473 gold badges17 silver badges26 bronze badges




    3,7473 gold badges17 silver badges26 bronze badges















    • The 10^-14 to 10^-15 URE rate is (in every case I've seen) quoted in terms of full sector errors per bits read. A value of 10^-12 would mean that for every 10^12 bits read, statistically you'd expect to see a full sector (4 KiB) read failure. That's 4 KiB in about 10^2 GiB (100 GiB) read. If that were the case, you could expect a single read pass over the contents of a reasonably-sized drive to come back with a few bad sectors. I doubt even the cheapskate SSDs are that bad.

      – a CVn
      May 28 at 13:57

















    • The 10^-14 to 10^-15 URE rate is (in every case I've seen) quoted in terms of full sector errors per bits read. A value of 10^-12 would mean that for every 10^12 bits read, statistically you'd expect to see a full sector (4 KiB) read failure. That's 4 KiB in about 10^2 GiB (100 GiB) read. If that were the case, you could expect a single read pass over the contents of a reasonably-sized drive to come back with a few bad sectors. I doubt even the cheapskate SSDs are that bad.

      – a CVn
      May 28 at 13:57
















    The 10^-14 to 10^-15 URE rate is (in every case I've seen) quoted in terms of full sector errors per bits read. A value of 10^-12 would mean that for every 10^12 bits read, statistically you'd expect to see a full sector (4 KiB) read failure. That's 4 KiB in about 10^2 GiB (100 GiB) read. If that were the case, you could expect a single read pass over the contents of a reasonably-sized drive to come back with a few bad sectors. I doubt even the cheapskate SSDs are that bad.

    – a CVn
    May 28 at 13:57





    The 10^-14 to 10^-15 URE rate is (in every case I've seen) quoted in terms of full sector errors per bits read. A value of 10^-12 would mean that for every 10^12 bits read, statistically you'd expect to see a full sector (4 KiB) read failure. That's 4 KiB in about 10^2 GiB (100 GiB) read. If that were the case, you could expect a single read pass over the contents of a reasonably-sized drive to come back with a few bad sectors. I doubt even the cheapskate SSDs are that bad.

    – a CVn
    May 28 at 13:57











    3


















    There are 2 ways to REDUCE the formation of bad sectors in a computer:



    1) Increase the amount of physical ram. With a modern operating system when it runs out of physical memory it will page out ram to the disk. This paging process is very disk intensive and it will destroy your SSD quickly.



    Under Windows 10 run the program "Resource Monitor" and check the Memory tab. If you don't have at least 50% ram allocated to "free & standby" then you probably don't have enough. As a rule of thumb windows 10 desktop systems need around 16GB of ram to minimize paging. With magnetic media you can get away with 8GB of ram because the magnetic media isn't "worn out" by paging. I think it's absolutely disgusting that computer sellers still sell devices with 4GB of ram in them but this industry has a lot of scammers in it.



    Some people with SSDs delete their paging file by going into Control Panel, System, Advanced System Settings, Settings, Advanced and changing it but I do not recommend this as if the system artificially runs out of swap space things will crash. And some Linux distros will crash without swap. Linux and I believe windows move seldom-used ram to swap to free up main ram for caching which speeds up the system



    I WOULD NOT run a swapless desktop or laptop with anything less than 32GB of ram.



    2) Add a small magnetic media disk (assuming you have a desktop) and move the swap to there.



    Your problem is very common with people who DO NOT UNDERSTAND computer performance. A common trick these days is to shove a too small SSD disk in a laptop with inadequate ram and then the salesman can demo the laptop booting up super fast and that gives the tech-wanna-be wet dreams in the store so they run out the door with the thing under their arm.



    There is NO substitute for increasing main core ram to speed up a computer. Yes it is much more expensive than an el-cheapo 256GB SSD but true speed costs money whether it's a car or a computer. A $5 fa rt can doesn't make a car go any faster anymore than a cheap SSD with inadequate core ram makes a computer go any faster.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 1





      Welcome to Super User Ted. Thank you for your answer, but can you edit it and add some citations for the claims you are making? Cheers

      – bertieb
      May 28 at 0:20















    3


















    There are 2 ways to REDUCE the formation of bad sectors in a computer:



    1) Increase the amount of physical ram. With a modern operating system when it runs out of physical memory it will page out ram to the disk. This paging process is very disk intensive and it will destroy your SSD quickly.



    Under Windows 10 run the program "Resource Monitor" and check the Memory tab. If you don't have at least 50% ram allocated to "free & standby" then you probably don't have enough. As a rule of thumb windows 10 desktop systems need around 16GB of ram to minimize paging. With magnetic media you can get away with 8GB of ram because the magnetic media isn't "worn out" by paging. I think it's absolutely disgusting that computer sellers still sell devices with 4GB of ram in them but this industry has a lot of scammers in it.



    Some people with SSDs delete their paging file by going into Control Panel, System, Advanced System Settings, Settings, Advanced and changing it but I do not recommend this as if the system artificially runs out of swap space things will crash. And some Linux distros will crash without swap. Linux and I believe windows move seldom-used ram to swap to free up main ram for caching which speeds up the system



    I WOULD NOT run a swapless desktop or laptop with anything less than 32GB of ram.



    2) Add a small magnetic media disk (assuming you have a desktop) and move the swap to there.



    Your problem is very common with people who DO NOT UNDERSTAND computer performance. A common trick these days is to shove a too small SSD disk in a laptop with inadequate ram and then the salesman can demo the laptop booting up super fast and that gives the tech-wanna-be wet dreams in the store so they run out the door with the thing under their arm.



    There is NO substitute for increasing main core ram to speed up a computer. Yes it is much more expensive than an el-cheapo 256GB SSD but true speed costs money whether it's a car or a computer. A $5 fa rt can doesn't make a car go any faster anymore than a cheap SSD with inadequate core ram makes a computer go any faster.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 1





      Welcome to Super User Ted. Thank you for your answer, but can you edit it and add some citations for the claims you are making? Cheers

      – bertieb
      May 28 at 0:20













    3














    3










    3









    There are 2 ways to REDUCE the formation of bad sectors in a computer:



    1) Increase the amount of physical ram. With a modern operating system when it runs out of physical memory it will page out ram to the disk. This paging process is very disk intensive and it will destroy your SSD quickly.



    Under Windows 10 run the program "Resource Monitor" and check the Memory tab. If you don't have at least 50% ram allocated to "free & standby" then you probably don't have enough. As a rule of thumb windows 10 desktop systems need around 16GB of ram to minimize paging. With magnetic media you can get away with 8GB of ram because the magnetic media isn't "worn out" by paging. I think it's absolutely disgusting that computer sellers still sell devices with 4GB of ram in them but this industry has a lot of scammers in it.



    Some people with SSDs delete their paging file by going into Control Panel, System, Advanced System Settings, Settings, Advanced and changing it but I do not recommend this as if the system artificially runs out of swap space things will crash. And some Linux distros will crash without swap. Linux and I believe windows move seldom-used ram to swap to free up main ram for caching which speeds up the system



    I WOULD NOT run a swapless desktop or laptop with anything less than 32GB of ram.



    2) Add a small magnetic media disk (assuming you have a desktop) and move the swap to there.



    Your problem is very common with people who DO NOT UNDERSTAND computer performance. A common trick these days is to shove a too small SSD disk in a laptop with inadequate ram and then the salesman can demo the laptop booting up super fast and that gives the tech-wanna-be wet dreams in the store so they run out the door with the thing under their arm.



    There is NO substitute for increasing main core ram to speed up a computer. Yes it is much more expensive than an el-cheapo 256GB SSD but true speed costs money whether it's a car or a computer. A $5 fa rt can doesn't make a car go any faster anymore than a cheap SSD with inadequate core ram makes a computer go any faster.






    share|improve this answer














    There are 2 ways to REDUCE the formation of bad sectors in a computer:



    1) Increase the amount of physical ram. With a modern operating system when it runs out of physical memory it will page out ram to the disk. This paging process is very disk intensive and it will destroy your SSD quickly.



    Under Windows 10 run the program "Resource Monitor" and check the Memory tab. If you don't have at least 50% ram allocated to "free & standby" then you probably don't have enough. As a rule of thumb windows 10 desktop systems need around 16GB of ram to minimize paging. With magnetic media you can get away with 8GB of ram because the magnetic media isn't "worn out" by paging. I think it's absolutely disgusting that computer sellers still sell devices with 4GB of ram in them but this industry has a lot of scammers in it.



    Some people with SSDs delete their paging file by going into Control Panel, System, Advanced System Settings, Settings, Advanced and changing it but I do not recommend this as if the system artificially runs out of swap space things will crash. And some Linux distros will crash without swap. Linux and I believe windows move seldom-used ram to swap to free up main ram for caching which speeds up the system



    I WOULD NOT run a swapless desktop or laptop with anything less than 32GB of ram.



    2) Add a small magnetic media disk (assuming you have a desktop) and move the swap to there.



    Your problem is very common with people who DO NOT UNDERSTAND computer performance. A common trick these days is to shove a too small SSD disk in a laptop with inadequate ram and then the salesman can demo the laptop booting up super fast and that gives the tech-wanna-be wet dreams in the store so they run out the door with the thing under their arm.



    There is NO substitute for increasing main core ram to speed up a computer. Yes it is much more expensive than an el-cheapo 256GB SSD but true speed costs money whether it's a car or a computer. A $5 fa rt can doesn't make a car go any faster anymore than a cheap SSD with inadequate core ram makes a computer go any faster.







    share|improve this answer













    share|improve this answer




    share|improve this answer










    answered May 27 at 21:23









    Ted MittelstaedtTed Mittelstaedt

    1311 bronze badge




    1311 bronze badge










    • 1





      Welcome to Super User Ted. Thank you for your answer, but can you edit it and add some citations for the claims you are making? Cheers

      – bertieb
      May 28 at 0:20












    • 1





      Welcome to Super User Ted. Thank you for your answer, but can you edit it and add some citations for the claims you are making? Cheers

      – bertieb
      May 28 at 0:20







    1




    1





    Welcome to Super User Ted. Thank you for your answer, but can you edit it and add some citations for the claims you are making? Cheers

    – bertieb
    May 28 at 0:20





    Welcome to Super User Ted. Thank you for your answer, but can you edit it and add some citations for the claims you are making? Cheers

    – bertieb
    May 28 at 0:20











    0


















    SSD's are rated in wear cycles. This means that the more writes to the SSD the further along you are in using up the total number of wear cycles on the SSD



    When main ram is overcommitted, the machine pages out to the swap file. This creates additional writes than would otherwise happen if the main ram was not overcommitted.



    Therefore one way to REDUCE writing to an SSD on a "regular PC" WITHOUT just turning it off or reducing use of it, is to reduce paging on it - reduce use of the swapfile.



    Increasing main ram decreases use of the swapfile because there are fewer writes to the swapfile.



    Unused main ram is allocated to the disk cache so even if the machine is NEVER overcomitted on ram (highly unusual for an average desktop) increasing the disk cache will also reduce writes to the SSD






    share|improve this answer
































      0


















      SSD's are rated in wear cycles. This means that the more writes to the SSD the further along you are in using up the total number of wear cycles on the SSD



      When main ram is overcommitted, the machine pages out to the swap file. This creates additional writes than would otherwise happen if the main ram was not overcommitted.



      Therefore one way to REDUCE writing to an SSD on a "regular PC" WITHOUT just turning it off or reducing use of it, is to reduce paging on it - reduce use of the swapfile.



      Increasing main ram decreases use of the swapfile because there are fewer writes to the swapfile.



      Unused main ram is allocated to the disk cache so even if the machine is NEVER overcomitted on ram (highly unusual for an average desktop) increasing the disk cache will also reduce writes to the SSD






      share|improve this answer






























        0














        0










        0









        SSD's are rated in wear cycles. This means that the more writes to the SSD the further along you are in using up the total number of wear cycles on the SSD



        When main ram is overcommitted, the machine pages out to the swap file. This creates additional writes than would otherwise happen if the main ram was not overcommitted.



        Therefore one way to REDUCE writing to an SSD on a "regular PC" WITHOUT just turning it off or reducing use of it, is to reduce paging on it - reduce use of the swapfile.



        Increasing main ram decreases use of the swapfile because there are fewer writes to the swapfile.



        Unused main ram is allocated to the disk cache so even if the machine is NEVER overcomitted on ram (highly unusual for an average desktop) increasing the disk cache will also reduce writes to the SSD






        share|improve this answer
















        SSD's are rated in wear cycles. This means that the more writes to the SSD the further along you are in using up the total number of wear cycles on the SSD



        When main ram is overcommitted, the machine pages out to the swap file. This creates additional writes than would otherwise happen if the main ram was not overcommitted.



        Therefore one way to REDUCE writing to an SSD on a "regular PC" WITHOUT just turning it off or reducing use of it, is to reduce paging on it - reduce use of the swapfile.



        Increasing main ram decreases use of the swapfile because there are fewer writes to the swapfile.



        Unused main ram is allocated to the disk cache so even if the machine is NEVER overcomitted on ram (highly unusual for an average desktop) increasing the disk cache will also reduce writes to the SSD







        share|improve this answer















        share|improve this answer




        share|improve this answer








        edited Jun 7 at 16:27









        Daniel K

        7545 silver badges13 bronze badges




        7545 silver badges13 bronze badges










        answered Jun 7 at 15:33









        user1046939user1046939

        1




        1































            draft saved

            draft discarded















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1441306%2fhow-to-prevent-bad-sectors%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown









            Popular posts from this blog

            Tamil (spriik) Luke uk diar | Nawigatjuun

            Align equal signs while including text over equalitiesAMS align: left aligned text/math plus multicolumn alignmentMultiple alignmentsAligning equations in multiple placesNumbering and aligning an equation with multiple columnsHow to align one equation with another multline equationUsing \ in environments inside the begintabularxNumber equations and preserving alignment of equal signsHow can I align equations to the left and to the right?Double equation alignment problem within align enviromentAligned within align: Why are they right-aligned?

            Where does the image of a data connector as a sharp metal spike originate from?Where does the concept of infected people turning into zombies only after death originate from?Where does the motif of a reanimated human head originate?Where did the notion that Dragons could speak originate?Where does the archetypal image of the 'Grey' alien come from?Where did the suffix '-Man' originate?Where does the notion of being injured or killed by an illusion originate?Where did the term “sophont” originate?Where does the trope of magic spells being driven by advanced technology originate from?Where did the term “the living impaired” originate?