HP3000-L Archives

June 1998, Week 4

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Neil Harvey <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Neil Harvey <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:02:46 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
Our clients have also experienced failures of these 4.3GB drives (Half
Height in a HASS).
Also usually early in the cycle - but cartainly NO less inconvenient.

In future, it may become policy to install new drives in a private
volume, exercise the #$%@ out of them for a few weeks, power cycle them
a LOT, and then move them tentatively into production, and advise the
client to pay HP.

Regards

Neil


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paveza, Gary [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 2:50 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Help! 4.3 gb drives failing
>
> If you are referring to the 4.3 Seagate drives in the Jamacia
> enclosures, we use them rather extensively (around 100+ of them).
> They work rather well, but we also notice that usually when we install
> a large number of them, we get a few failures right away.  If you can
> make it past around the first month or so, you should be fine with
> only minimal failures.  I can only guess that some batches of the
> discs are destined to fail fast.
>
> Gary L. Paveza, Jr.
> Technical Support Specialist
> All opinions are mine and not those of my employer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:   Nick Perna [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:   Tuesday, June 23, 1998 11:32 PM
> To:     [log in to unmask]@inetgw
> Subject:        Help! 4.3 gb drives failing
>
> We have installed the new storage unit that holds 8 of the new 4.3 gb
> drives (we have 4 drives installed in this unit).  These drives were
> installed just two weeks ago and we've since had 2 of the drives fail.
> And since they didn't fail at the same time we've been busy doing
> reloads.  My question to all of you is:  Is anyone else having
> problems
> with these drives or was this just a fluke?  We're down right now and
> any input about the reliablitity of these drives is appreciated.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2