Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 14:33:27 +0100 From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best kind of hard drive for heavy use? Message-ID: <20160914143327.3b7d3c36@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <20160914051806.297c0c3f@archlinux.localdomain> References: <42.56.05022.D3A48D75@dnvrco-oedge02> <20160913213649.3a3f26b2@archlinux.localdomain> <0d1b8dba-3292-9991-ea7d-f160c25090c8@netfence.it> <20160914051806.297c0c3f@archlinux.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 05:18:06 +0200 Ralf Mardorf via freebsd-questions wrote: > On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 22:38:55 +0200, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > >(Speaking of WD Green, not WD in general) it is true, unless you run > >their utility (DOS only!) which disables this "feature". > >However the drives will tend to fail in a short time all the same. > > That perhaps was true for some older drives, that spin down after a > few seconds, but it anyway required something to wake up the drives > again. Howvere, it's untrue for those drives that are just a few > years old. My spins down after 30 minutes, and stays a sleep , if no > evil software touches it. Drives are typically rated for 300k load-cycles, so at 30 minutes it's a non-issue - running the drive cooler and avoiding wear on the moving parts probably extends its life. > I don't use gvfs, smartd and similar software > that touches the drives and enforce a spin up, directly after the > drives goes asleep. Are you saying that smartd does that when it's only monitoring? And do you mean all drives, or just the one the OS is on?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160914143327.3b7d3c36>