We seem to be having two schools of thought around the office and I am having trouble finding any manufacturer's documentation or other facts to support arguments on either side.
We had a failed drive in a RAID5 array. Now first of all I understand there s a lot of discussion out there about whether RAID5 is even necessary nowadays, but it is in this particular server. So that is not what this is about. The question is about what to do with the failed drive:
Past experience for some has been that tech support for the manufacturer recommended first testing and then reseating said failed drive to see if the problem was due to a controller glitch, drive being loose, etc.
Others say that you shouldn't reseat a failed drive because you risk corrupting the rest of the array during the rebuild process.
- I can understand if the drive is under warranty, you might as well replace it anyway, but that could take longer than rebuilding the failed drive.
- I also understand there is risk to another disk failing during a rebuild of the array, but is that somehow made worse if the drive you are rebuilding has previously failed?
I know there are certain rules on EE regarding third party website links, but if you could provide support to your arguments, especially with manufacturer's technical documents, that would be great. Not that this is my opinion, but I am especially interested in anything that specifically says why you shouldn't reseat an already failed drive.