Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

Search Micromat Forum

Keyword

TOPIC: Repair a S.M.A.R.T. error using TechTool Pro 8

Repair a S.M.A.R.T. error using TechTool Pro 8 18 Mar 2017 10:28 #8113

My late 2013 iMac running on Mac OS El Capitan reported a S.M.A.R.T. error. It'S SSD. How can I repair it using TechTool Pro 8? Please find attached the screenshot taken for better understanding on my current situation. When I tried to upgrade to MacOS Sierra it prompted that I need to back up and replace the disk entirely. Is replacing the hard disk necessary?

Cheers,
Yazid
Attachments:
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Repair a S.M.A.R.T. error using TechTool Pro 8 18 Mar 2017 12:13 #8114

In order to interpret the results of a S.M.A.R.T. test, we would need to see all of the S.M.A.R.T. attributes, to see which ones are "failing". Use the S.M.A.R.T. test in TechTool Pro. There are currently some inherent problems with interpreting S.M.A.R.T. tests on SSD drives. Below are two earlier discussions of this topic.

In any case, no software program can fix the types of problems that S.M.A.R.T. testing detects. By its nature, S.M.A.R.T. testing detects hardware failures.

******

I have tried to make it clear in other threads that the interpretation of a few specific S.M.A.R.T. test results with SSD drives is at this time inherently problematic because normal wear-leveling is in some cases being interpreted by the drive itself as remapping of bad blocks to spare blocks.

The reason the program is reporting a S.M.A.R.T. failure is that the current value of the specific attribute is below what is called the threshold value. That is the way all S.M.A.R.T. testing works. If you tried the demo of SMART Utility from Volitans Software, you would get the same result. The problem is with the way the SSD drives have implemented S.M.A.R.T. testing. As always, the best thing to do is to contact the make of the drive. In some cases, they have a firmware update that improves the implementation of the S.M.A.R.T. reporting.

******

Earlier posting (link titled "inherently problematic" above)

From <<www.micromat.com/component/kunena/techto...-a-r-t-failures#7981>> :

@mreed4@nyc.rr.com,

If you read carefully what I have written in these forums, you will see that I have repeatedly and constantly stressed that the proper interpretation of the S.M.A.R.T. data that TechTool Pro is reading from the firmware of the drive can, with regard to some S.M.A.R.T. attributes, only be done by the maker of the drive mechanism.

All S.M.A.R.T. utilities are written to report a "failure" when the current value of a particular S.M.A.R.T. attribute falls below a threshold value for that particular attribute that is stored in the drive's firmware. The utility is simply comparing the current value to the threshold value. For some S.M.A.R.T. attributes, such as Reallocated Sectors Count (5) and Reallocation Event Count (196), the interpretation of these results is problematic on SSD drives because of the way they perform wear leveling. That is why I have suggested contacting the maker of the drive mechanism. It is clear that the industry has some work to do to improve S.M.A.R.T. reporting on SSD drives.
MicroMat Inc
Makers of TechTool
Last Edit: 18 Mar 2017 12:15 by micromattech3.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.279 seconds