Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
update with SMART vs Scrutiny details.
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
AnalogJ committed May 13, 2022
1 parent b5920e3 commit 5adceeb
Showing 1 changed file with 13 additions and 0 deletions.
13 changes: 13 additions & 0 deletions docs/TROUBLESHOOTING_DEVICE_COLLECTOR.md
Expand Up @@ -118,6 +118,19 @@ instead of the block device (`/dev/nvme0n1`). See [#209](https://github.com/Anal
### Volume Mount All Devices (`/dev`) - Privileged


## Scrutiny detects Failure but SMART Passed?

There's 2 different mechanisms that Scrutiny uses to detect failures.

The first is simple SMART failures. If SMART thinks an attribute is in a failed state, Scrutiny will display it as failed as well.

The second is using BackBlaze failure data: [https://backblaze.com/blog-smart-stats-2014-8.html](https://backblaze.com/blog-smart-stats-2014-8.html)
If Scrutiny detects that an attribute corresponds with a high rate of failure using BackBlaze's data, it will also mark that attribute (and disk) as failed (even though SMART may think the device is still healthy).

This can cause some confusion when comparing Scrutiny's dashboard against other SMART analysis tools.
If you hover over the "failed" label beside an attribute, Scrutiny will tell you if the failure was due to SMART or Scrutiny/BackBlaze data.


## Hub & Spoke model, with multiple Hosts.

When deploying Scrutiny in a hub & spoke model, it can be difficult to determine exactly which node a set of devices are associated with.
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 5adceeb

Please sign in to comment.