Drive Retry Time Tracking for Storage System Stability

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current disk drive failure prediction methods in data storage systems are inadequate as they rely solely on counter-based retry thresholds without considering response time, leading to potential system panics and require extensive error handling knowledge, failing to proactively manage drives that take excessively long to respond.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a mechanism where the physical drive object tracks overall retry time and initiates health checks, allowing the RAID object to proactively handle drive failures by considering time-based retry policies and simplifying the interface for error handling, enabling the system to determine whether an I/O can be retried and how long to wait before retrying, and performing self-tests to recover or replace faulty drives.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If counter-based retry thresholds are used to manage drive failures, then error monitoring is simplified, but response time is not considered leading to potential system panics

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror monitoring simplicityVSAvoidsystem stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameter from counter-based retry thresholds to time-based retry thresholds. Instead of counting the number of retry attempts, the system now monitors the total time spent on retry operations. This parameter change allows the system to consider both error counters and response times, preventing system panics by timing out slow drives while maintaining operational simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If extensive error handling knowledge is required to manage drive failures, then precise error management is achieved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror management precisionVSAvoiderror handling complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements self-service by allowing the drive itself to report its status through the physical drive object, which automatically determines whether an I/O can be retried and tracks retry time. The system automatically takes offline drives that exceed the retry time threshold without requiring extensive external error handling knowledge or complex management procedures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Reliability

If drives are taken offline immediately upon error detection, then data corruption is prevented, but downtime increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata integrityVSAvoiddrive downtime
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by tracking the overall retry time before taking offline action. Instead of immediately taking a drive offline upon error detection, the system allows for a predetermined retry period. If the drive does not respond within this time threshold, it is then taken offline. This prevents premature offline actions while still protecting against data corruption from unresponsive drives.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS8782465B1Managing drive problems in data storage systems by tracking overall retry time
Publication Date: 2014.07.15 EMC IP HLDG CO LLC
  • US8782465B1 patent drawing
  • US8782465B1 patent drawing
  • US8782465B1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method is used in managing drive problems in data storage systems. It is determined, by a physical drive object, whether an I/O with a drive is able to be retried by another object. An overall retry time for the I/O is tracked. If the overall retry time is excessive, the drive is taken offline.