Current generation magnetic disk storage devices are vulnerable to data integrity problems that appear gradually. At first, recovery from such problems may require only the use of the conventional drive Error Correcting Code (ECC) processing or Input/Output (I/O) retry operations. However, these problems gradually worsen to the point that data may become unrecoverable. An example of a data integrity problem of this kind is known as “track squeeze”.
Track squeeze is seen especially in very high data density devices, when they are used under high loads in server applications. It appears when a track on the disk drive is written only rarely, while one or both of the adjacent tracks are written much more frequently. Due to the finite positioning tolerance of the head actuator mechanism, the electromagnetic forces used to effect adjacent track writes intrude to some extent into the rarely written track, causing reduced signal strength of the affected track. This in turn causes data errors during read operations. This problem can be reduced or avoided by reducing the track density on the disk surface or increasing the sophistication and accuracy of the head actuator and the data read process, but all of these techniques have associated cost.
When errors such a track squeeze initially begin to appear, the impact is modest enough that conventional disk drive error recovery mechanisms (such as read retry or drive ECC) can recover the data. In that case, the problem is not visible to higher layer I/O processing or application programs as an error, but it nevertheless causes performance loss due to the time required to perform these corrective mechanisms.
As gradual onset errors such as track squeeze become more severe, they progress beyond the point where disk drive error recovery mechanisms can handle them. In that case, I/O operations begin to fail at the disk drive level. Mechanisms for fault tolerant data storage such as Redundant Arrays of Independent Disks ( ) are effective for maintaining data availability even in the presence of unrecoverable errors in the underlying disk drives. However, this is only the case when the error rate is low enough that the probability of errors beyond the recovery capability of RAID is extremely low. Therefore, normal practice with RAID is to consider as “failed” any disk drive that produces more than a very low error rate.
In the presence of problems such as track squeeze, such a practice may cause disk drives to be considered as “failed” at a rate well in excess of what is acceptable to customers or economically tolerable to storage system suppliers.
Thus there is a need for a mechanism that can detect gradual onset errors such as track squeeze, and then take corrective action to eliminate the error. Such a mechanism would allow disk drives to continue in normal service as good drives.
The present invention is directed to techniques that detect impending data errors such as the track squeeze problem, and, furthermore, to repair the problem or impending problem when detected, such as by rewriting the affected tracks. In many cases the problem is detected and repair is effected when the original data can still be read. As a result, that original data is used directly to do the repair.
In other cases, the data is no longer readable on the disk in question, but when the disk is part of a RAID system, or other system in which higher level, system fault tolerance mechanisms are implemented, the missing data can be recovered via RAID layer mechanisms and then used to repair the track squeeze problem.
The invention can be implemented as firmware in a storage system, as a component of a general purpose operating system, or inside individual disk drives, or it can use a combination of these implementations.
The invention can also be implemented as part of a functioning system in use by a customer in the field, in a manufacturing screening process, or in a diagnosis and repair of units returned from the field.
The present invention offers a number of advantages over the prior art.
It is frequently desirable to reduce the cost of disk drives in a storage system. This need is particularly acute in massive storage arrays consisting of many individual storage units. “Commodity” drives based on technology used in high volume desktop PC systems are usually the most attractive option, since they provide the lowest cost per megabyte of storage. However, most manufacturers of storage arrays typically consider the commodity drives having the highest available storage density per unit to not be the best choice, because they typically do not provide the highest reliability. For example, while gradual onset errors such a track squeeze can potentially occur in any modern type of disk drive, they are a particular concern in commodity disk drives because of the higher track density and the cost pressures on the drive mechanical and electronic components. In a personal computer (PC) intended for use by an individual, a typical access to the drive occurs so infrequently that errors do not appreciably affect performance. However, in storage arrays used in file servers and the like, as mentioned above, it is necessary to keep disk drive error rates very low, not only to avoid customer data loss, but also to control product support costs due to drive replacement.
By detecting errors such as track squeeze usually before the point where they are severe enough to cause unrecoverable data loss, the invention protects customer data from these errors. And by corrective action that actually repairs the underlying problem, the invention effectively eliminates errors such as track squeeze from being a factor in limiting the useful life of disk drives or a factor in the failure rate of disk drives in the field. Repairing the underlying problem also repairs the performance loss that appears when the errors are still recoverable by normal disk drive recovery mechanisms such as ECC or read retry. These benefits now makes it economically feasible to now use lower cost higher density disk drives (“commodity” drives), which provide desktop PC technology and manufacturing efficiencies, in high-availability applications such as server and network attached storage systems.
Also, the invention relies only on properties of conventional industry standard disk drives. It does not require any specialized error indications, counters, or non-standard drive commands. Furthermore, the invention comprises both detection and repair, after which the impending problem is eliminated. It is not merely an enhanced read error retry scheme—which might delay the point at which gradual onset errors become unrecoverable, and which does not correct the underlying problem.
The foregoing will be apparent from the following more particular description of example embodiments of the invention, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating embodiments of the present invention.
A description of example embodiments of the invention follows.
The processes described below may be implemented in computer 100, in storage controller 120, or within drive electronics 150 contained in the disk drives 140. When implemented in computer 100, typically the implementation would be part of the operating system or device drivers installed in that computer. When implemented in computer 100 or storage controller 120, the recovery process described in
In addition, the processes described below might be implemented in part in one component and in part in another. For example, the detection processes described in
In each of these flow charts, the process shown performs the actual I/O operations requested by other components of the system, along with detection steps that serve to detect impending data errors. The intent of these steps is to be able, in many cases, to indicate that data loss is threatened before such loss actually occurs. As a result, the threatened data is typically still readable, and this data is available for the repair process. Several of the variations shown here rely on a common characteristic of the class of errors to be detected, namely that the early stages of gradual onset errors such as track squeeze are recoverable by the disk drive using its normal error recovery mechanism, but these mechanisms take time and are therefore detectable by observing the drive performance. It should be noted that these approaches are applicable to all disk drives, and are not dependent on any unusual or customized error reporting capabilities in the disk drives.
In each of these processes, the corrective action has the effect of completely repairing the impending error; that is, the operation of the disk (for that track or portion of the track) is restored to full normal operation at normal performance. This produces several benefits. First, the gradual onset of the data integrity error is stopped before it becomes severe enough to make the data unrecoverable. Second, as discussed above, the normal disk drive recovery mechanisms triggered by the gradual onset error have a cost in I/O performance; the repair process, by eliminating the error, restores the drive to its full performance. The corrective action appropriate for the “track squeeze” error is rewriting of the affected tracks or portion of a track. A single rewrite operation suffices for current generation disk drives. However, the processes described here are not limited to a single rewrite operation, and other recovery mechanisms (for example, multiple rewrite operations) may be employed if the disk drive technology changes to make such changes necessary. Furthermore, the recovery process may rewrite a region larger than a single track. This effectively handles cases where track squeeze occurs on several adjacent tracks, or when the disk access patterns are such that detectable track squeeze on one track is an indication that track squeeze is likely to be a near-term risk on other tracks in the region.
In
The process begins at step 810 by initializing an error counter. Next, at step 820, a read request is performed according to any of the processes described in
In
In
Surface scan process 1000 generates read requests such as to scan over the entire disk drive, or array of disk drives. Typically, this process will be responsive to system load to avoid a significant impact on application performance. These I/O requests are passed down the layers. The lowest processing layer 930 is the conventional I/O processing layer, for example a device driver. Layered above that layer 930 is impending error detection layer 920, which implements any of the processes described in
Graph 1200 is a typical example of measured I/O throughput for a fully functional drive. The graph shows disk block address on the X-axis vs. throughput on the Y-axis. As shown here, throughput is not constant for all blocks; instead it varies in a fairly smooth fashion according to block address. The underlying reason for this is that in modern disk drives the number of blocks per track (i.e., per disk revolution) changes according to the circumference of the track, so lower block numbers, which are closer to the outer (longer) tracks, correspond to more sectors accessed per disk revolution. For a given disk drive model, the expected throughput graph 1200 is fixed, and can be learned from data provided by the drive manufacturer or measured during system design or as part of drive type acceptance.
Graph 1210 shows an example of the change in I/O throughput caused by gradual onset errors such as track squeeze. In this example, region 1220 of the graph shows lower than expected throughput and deviates significantly from the corresponding region of the normal smooth graph 1200. This deviation, when it exceeds a threshold set by design, is used in the process described in
While this invention has been particularly shown and described with references to example embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the scope of the invention encompassed by the appended claims.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/841,258, filed May 7, 2004 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,475,276. The entire teachings of the above application(s) are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4516165 | Cunningham et al. | May 1985 | A |
5166936 | Ewert et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5379162 | Cunningham et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5974544 | Jeffries et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6204660 | Lee | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6324660 | Majima et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6384599 | Chan et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397347 | Masuyama et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6405277 | Jen et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6442705 | Lamberts | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6628471 | Min et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6882489 | Brunnett et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
7023648 | Mizukoshi | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7650686 | Quilapquilap | Jan 2010 | B2 |
20020067567 | Szita | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20030026019 | Smith | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20040193798 | Kuwamura | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050007690 | Wong et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0114255 | Jul 1984 | EP |
59 121606 | Jul 1984 | JP |
05-257617 | Oct 1993 | JP |
H05-257617 | Oct 1993 | JP |
10-340401 | Dec 1998 | JP |
11-338648 | Dec 1999 | JP |
2000-311452 | Nov 2000 | JP |
2000-322334 | Nov 2000 | JP |
2000-322334 | Nov 2000 | JP |
2004-063013 | Feb 2004 | JP |
2004-110946 | Apr 2004 | JP |
2004-273060 | Sep 2004 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090083584 A1 | Mar 2009 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10841258 | May 2004 | US |
Child | 12284021 | US |