(fedora-34; gnome)
The evening before doing a Fedora upgrade, I do a user data back-up. I do it as a data project in K3b to burn a DVD/Blu-ray (BD-R). I always "test" the back-up immediately after it's done.
On April 07, 2021, I did such a back-up. I upgraded from f-32 to f-33 the next day. Today, when I put the disc into the drive, it automatically mounts and asks if I wish to view contents in Caja. In Caja, I successfully viewed an image stored on the disc, launched in Firefox an html file stored on the disc, and opened in LibreOffice a LibreOffice file stored on the disc. The disc was successfully unmounted and ejected when I asked Caja to do so. Also today, if I launch Files and then put the disc into the drive, it automatically mounts the disc. In Files, I successfully viewed an image stored on the disc, launched in Firefox an html file stored on the disc, and opened in LibreOffice a LibreOffice file stored on the disc. The disc was successfully unmounted and ejected when I asked Files to do so.
On October 13, I did a user data back-up. Immediately after, I "tested" the back-up. 1. When I put the disc into the drive, nothing showed up on the screen. But I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 2. When I launched Files and then put the disc into the drive, the "+ Other Locations" flickered once, and that's all. But when I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 3. When I launched Caja and then put the disc into the drive, a message popped up "Unable to mount .F33_20211013 An operation is already pending". But when I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 4. When I launched Disks and then put the disc into the drive, the icon for the drive showed a disc. When I clicked that disc icon, it showed it mounted. When I clicked the mount path that showed below the graphic part of Disks, it launched Caja. I then successfully completed the "test" just as I did with the April 07 back-up disc, except that I had to use Disks to unmount and eject the disk. Also, I was able to restore a files from the back-up disc when using the Caja instance launched by Disks. I went ahead and upgraded from f-33 to f-34 the next day.
Today, when I repeat steps 1-4 above using the October 13 back-up, I get the same results.
Both back-up discs are Verbatum MDISC BD-R Blu-ray Disc, 25GB, 4x speed. Both were written with the same drive.
What went wrong, and how do I fix it?
Thank-you in advance. Bill.
On 26/10/2021 22:44, home user wrote:
(fedora-34; gnome)
The evening before doing a Fedora upgrade, I do a user data back-up. I do it as a data project in K3b to burn a DVD/Blu-ray (BD-R). I always "test" the back-up immediately after it's done.
On April 07, 2021, I did such a back-up. I upgraded from f-32 to f-33 the next day. Today, when I put the disc into the drive, it automatically mounts and asks if I wish to view contents in Caja. In Caja, I successfully viewed an image stored on the disc, launched in Firefox an html file stored on the disc, and opened in LibreOffice a LibreOffice file stored on the disc. The disc was successfully unmounted and ejected when I asked Caja to do so. Also today, if I launch Files and then put the disc into the drive, it automatically mounts the disc. In Files, I successfully viewed an image stored on the disc, launched in Firefox an html file stored on the disc, and opened in LibreOffice a LibreOffice file stored on the disc. The disc was successfully unmounted and ejected when I asked Files to do so.
On October 13, I did a user data back-up. Immediately after, I "tested" the back-up. 1. When I put the disc into the drive, nothing showed up on the screen. But I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 2. When I launched Files and then put the disc into the drive, the "+ Other Locations" flickered once, and that's all. But when I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 3. When I launched Caja and then put the disc into the drive, a message popped up "Unable to mount .F33_20211013 An operation is already pending". But when I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 4. When I launched Disks and then put the disc into the drive, the icon for the drive showed a disc. When I clicked that disc icon, it showed it mounted. When I clicked the mount path that showed below the graphic part of Disks, it launched Caja. I then successfully completed the "test" just as I did with the April 07 back-up disc, except that I had to use Disks to unmount and eject the disk. Also, I was able to restore a files from the back-up disc when using the Caja instance launched by Disks. I went ahead and upgraded from f-33 to f-34 the next day.
Today, when I repeat steps 1-4 above using the October 13 back-up, I get the same results.
Both back-up discs are Verbatum MDISC BD-R Blu-ray Disc, 25GB, 4x speed. Both were written with the same drive.
What went wrong, and how do I fix it?
Sounds like you have an "intermittent" issue with your DVD drive. Dust? How old is the drive? I've had drives just slowly die and other just dead after not being used for some time.
I stopped using DVD's and CD's a long time ago. I only use it if I have to boot a live DVD since my motherboard doesn't support booting from USB. USB drives are quite inexpensive and more reliable than discs with the added advantage of having higher capacity. Why not switch?
-- On Facebook it is called Vaguebooking.
On 10/26/21 10:08 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 26/10/2021 22:44, home user wrote:
(fedora-34; gnome)
The evening before doing a Fedora upgrade, I do a user data back-up. I do it as a data project in K3b to burn a DVD/Blu-ray (BD-R). I always "test" the back-up immediately after it's done.
On April 07, 2021, I did such a back-up. I upgraded from f-32 to f-33 the next day. Today, when I put the disc into the drive, it automatically mounts and asks if I wish to view contents in Caja. In Caja, I successfully viewed an image stored on the disc, launched in Firefox an html file stored on the disc, and opened in LibreOffice a LibreOffice file stored on the disc. The disc was successfully unmounted and ejected when I asked Caja to do so. Also today, if I launch Files and then put the disc into the drive, it automatically mounts the disc. In Files, I successfully viewed an image stored on the disc, launched in Firefox an html file stored on the disc, and opened in LibreOffice a LibreOffice file stored on the disc. The disc was successfully unmounted and ejected when I asked Files to do so.
On October 13, I did a user data back-up. Immediately after, I "tested" the back-up. 1. When I put the disc into the drive, nothing showed up on the screen. But I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 2. When I launched Files and then put the disc into the drive, the "+ Other Locations" flickered once, and that's all. But when I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 3. When I launched Caja and then put the disc into the drive, a message popped up "Unable to mount .F33_20211013 An operation is already pending". But when I then launched Disks, the disc was there and mounted; it unmounted and ejected the disc when I told it to. 4. When I launched Disks and then put the disc into the drive, the icon for the drive showed a disc. When I clicked that disc icon, it showed it mounted. When I clicked the mount path that showed below the graphic part of Disks, it launched Caja. I then successfully completed the "test" just as I did with the April 07 back-up disc, except that I had to use Disks to unmount and eject the disk. Also, I was able to restore a files from the back-up disc when using the Caja instance launched by Disks. I went ahead and upgraded from f-33 to f-34 the next day.
Today, when I repeat steps 1-4 above using the October 13 back-up, I get the same results.
Both back-up discs are Verbatum MDISC BD-R Blu-ray Disc, 25GB, 4x speed. Both were written with the same drive.
What went wrong, and how do I fix it?
Sounds like you have an "intermittent" issue with your DVD drive. Dust? How old is the drive? I've had drives just slowly die and other just dead after not being used for some time.
If the problem were the drive (or dust), then wouldn't the April disc have the same problems, and wouldn't the October disc not work in Disks?
The drive is 8 years old. It's not heavily used; maybe 3 or 4 times per year in the past 6+ years.
I stopped using DVD's and CD's a long time ago. I only use it if I have to boot a live DVD since my motherboard doesn't support booting from USB. USB drives are quite inexpensive and more reliable than discs with the added advantage of having higher capacity. Why not switch?
Someday, but not yet.
thanks, Bill.
On 28/10/2021 00:09, home user wrote:
If the problem were the drive (or dust), then wouldn't the April disc have the same problems, and wouldn't the October disc not work in Disks?
Not necessarily. Remember there are multiple lasers in the drive. If the one responsible for writing is getting weak or was impacted by dust at the time it may cause a poorly written disc.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, the disc you're using is write once media. So, you could have a media issue.
The drive is 8 years old. It's not heavily used; maybe 3 or 4 times per year in the past 6+ years.
As I mentioned, I don't use my optical drives much. But I've found several dead when I've gone to use them. So, usage may not always be an indicator of health.
I stopped using DVD's and CD's a long time ago. I only use it if I have to boot a live DVD since my motherboard doesn't support booting from USB. USB drives are quite inexpensive and more reliable than discs with the added advantage of having higher capacity. Why not switch?
Someday, but not yet.
FWIW, I don't even use those. I do daily user backups to a NAS using rsync. Still a USB thumb drive is much better and more reliable than optical storage.
Anyway, my experience/knowledge of optical storage is limited. So, I've got no more suggestions. :-(
-- On Facebook it is called Vaguebooking.
On Thu, 2021-10-28 at 06:54 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Still a USB thumb drive is much better and more reliable than optical storage.
I'm more confident the other way around.
On 28/10/2021 12:14, Tim via users wrote:
On Thu, 2021-10-28 at 06:54 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Still a USB thumb drive is much better and more reliable than optical storage.
I'm more confident the other way around.
Maybe I'm one of the few lucky ones? I have 2 thumb drives of 128GB from SanDisk I've used for 2~3 years with no issues. An 8GB one from Transcend that I've had for about 5 years. And a non-name one that I don't recall how old it is but has no issues.
I've replaced the optical drive in my Tower 3 times since 2008 and have media written on previous drives be unreadable on the replacement drive. The optical drive in my Asus laptop died a few years ago and I decided not to replace it.
I also have multiple SSD from Crucial that have power on hours of at least 4 years with 0 NAND blocks being reallocated.
But, when it comes to backups, I have much more confidence in my RAID enabled NAS and rsync. :-)
-- On Facebook it is called Vaguebooking.
On 28 Oct 2021, at 05:36, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
On 28/10/2021 12:14, Tim via users wrote:
On Thu, 2021-10-28 at 06:54 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Still a USB thumb drive is much better and more reliable than optical storage.
I'm more confident the other way around.
Maybe I'm one of the few lucky ones? I have 2 thumb drives of 128GB from SanDisk I've used for 2~3 years with no issues. An 8GB one from Transcend that I've had for about 5 years. And a non-name one that I don't recall how old it is but has no issues.
The key information you need for flash memory devices is the ENDURANCE which is the amount of data that can be written to the device before it fails. It is typically quoted in TBW - Terabytes Written.
There is a standard for measuring the figure for various work loads.
I think it is JESD218 which there is an overview of at
https://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/focus/flash/solid-state-drives https://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/focus/flash/solid-state-drives
but the specs are behind a paywall now. (Used to be free to download).
The standard is interesting, but not required reading you will pleased to know.
There are two workloads that are often quoted in spec sheets. The client workload - meaning a typical office worker workload. The server workload - meaning a server workload.
There is also a random workload, but its is rare to see that quoted as the life times are very short.
Personal I will not buy an SSD or memory stick that does not publish its JESD218 client workload figures.
As examples I've quickly found specs for samsung and SanDisk.
On https://www.samsung.com/uk/memory-storage/nvme-ssd/970-evo-plus-nvme-m-2-ssd... https://www.samsung.com/uk/memory-storage/nvme-ssd/970-evo-plus-nvme-m-2-ssd-1tb-mz-v7s1t0bw/ find endurance on the page. It tells you that the drive 1200TBW.
Then figures for SanDisk SSD's are here https://kb.sandisk.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/23603/~/ssd-endurance https://kb.sandisk.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/23603/~/ssd-endurance and you can compare these figures, the best is 600TBW.
FYI the last SSD I got was a Intel part and its had 1000TBW+ Endurance.
I've replaced the optical drive in my Tower 3 times since 2008 and have media written on previous drives be unreadable on the replacement drive. The optical drive in my Asus laptop died a few years ago and I decided not to replace it.
I also have multiple SSD from Crucial that have power on hours of at least 4 years with 0 NAND blocks being reallocated.
power-on-hours and reallocations are interesing, but its the endurance you need to predict life time. Assuming you can calculate a figure the amount of data that you write your device.
But, when it comes to backups, I have much more confidence in my RAID enabled NAS and rsync. :-)
I back to a file server from all my hosts, then copy off the backups and put that copy off site.
All use Fedora of course.
Barry
-- On Facebook it is called Vaguebooking. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On 10/27/21 4:54 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 28/10/2021 00:09, home user wrote:
If the problem were the drive (or dust), then wouldn't the April disc have the same problems, and wouldn't the October disc not work in Disks?
Not necessarily. Remember there are multiple lasers in the drive. If the one responsible for writing is getting weak or was impacted by dust at the time it may cause a poorly written disc.
"Disks" (see attachment) is properly handling the October 13 disc, so it's highly unlikely that the problem is the burner/drive or the disc itself. The behavior I've reported is most likely in "Files" and "Caja", or whatever is under their hood. 1. Does Fedora have a way of scanning the disc for hard or burning defects as "SMART" can do for the hard drive? 2. Is there something I need to do (configuration? customization?) to "Files" and "Caja", or is the problem something I should submit a bug on? This would have started in F-33. 3. Did something change in F-33 that would have changed what/how data is written to the disc? The October 13 disc was burned using K3b running in F33. This is the first time I've encountered this problem. Is a bug needed? .... or is some customization/configuration change needed?
Also, if I'm not mistaken, the disc you're using is write once media. So, you could have a media issue.
The disk is write-once. But if the problem were the media, "Disks" probably would not have handled the disc successfully.
I stopped using DVD's and CD's a long time ago. I only use it if I have to boot a live DVD since my motherboard doesn't support booting from USB. USB drives are quite inexpensive and more reliable than discs with the added advantage of having higher capacity. Why not switch?
Someday, but not yet.
FWIW, I don't even use those. I do daily user backups to a NAS using rsync. Still a USB thumb drive is much better and more reliable than optical storage.
Actually, my weekly incremental back-ups (done just before doing my weekly patches) are done to USB thumb drives. This has been true for a few years now.
Switching the much bigger pre-upgrade back-up does not solve the existing problem. But it's a good idea for the future, after I use up the MDISCs I already have (they're not cheap!).
Bill.
-
Barry Scott -
Ed Greshko -
home user -
Tim