I remember this used to be the case, but it seems to be the opposite now. What is interesting is in the lower priced drives there seems to be a trade off for the non recoverable error rate and load / unload cycles. When I looked at drives over year ago for my storage I went with 1TB Hitachi 7K1000 as they were a good price, rated for 24/7 operation, and had the 1 per 1.0 E15 bits error rate. Recently prices have come down and when I put together my ESXi box I went with 500GB WD RE3 drives which offer the best rating all around. Ryan WD RE3 http://products.wdc.com/library/specsheet/eng/2879-701281.pdf Load/Unload Cycles 300,000 Error Rate: 1 per 1.0 E15 bits WD Caviar Black http://products.wdc.com/library/specsheet/eng/2879-701276.pdf Load/Unload Cycles 300,000 Error Rate: 1 per 1.0 E14 bits WD Caviar Blue http://products.wdc.com/library/specsheet/eng/2879-701277.pdf Load/Unload Cycles 50,000 minimum Error Rate: 1 per 1.0 E15 bits Seagate ES.2 http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ds_barracuda_es_2.pdf Load/Unload Cycles: Not Published Error Rate: 1 per 1.0 E15 bits Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ds_barracuda_7200_12.pdf Load/Unload Cycles 50,000 Error Rate: 1 per 1.0 E14 bits Hitachi 7K1000 http://www.hitachigst.com/tech/techlib.nsf/techdocs/67A68C59B27368FC862572570080FC70/$file/Deskstar7K1000_010307_final.pdf Load/Unload Cycles 50,000 Error Rate: 1 per 1.0 E15 bits Hitachi 7K1000.B http://www.hitachigst.com/tech/techlib.nsf/techdocs/D70FC3A0F32161868625747B00832876/$file/Deskstar_7K1000.B_DS.pdf Load/Unload Cycles 300,000 Error Rate: 1 per 1.0 E14 bits On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Matt Garman <matthew.garman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 08:48:03PM -0700, jahammonds prost wrote: >> I can do this on single drives using hdparm -S to set the spindown >> timeout, and the disks will spin up on activity as needed. Is >> there something similar I can do with an md array? I can see >> there's a /sys/block/md0/power/wakeup file, but I can't seem to >> find any documentation on it. I have thought about doing an hdparm >> -S on the array disks, but I suspect that would be A Bad Thing >> (tm). > > On the same note, does anyone have any thoughts on the wear-and-tear > caused by frequent spinup/spindown cycles? > > My fileserver has the Western Digital RE2 "enterprise" grade drives. > I remember reading (years ago) that, in general, "enterprise" grade > drives were designed to be always running (think 24/7 server), and > rarely spun down. As such, they did not tolerate a "consumer > desktop" usage pattern very well, and trying to save power in this > way would actually cause them to fail prematurely. > > Is/was such a thing true? Is it worth worrying about? > > Thanks, > Matt > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
