> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, Richard Troy wrote: > > always based upon network packets headed their way... If we could tolerate > > the delay of a "wake", is there any power advantage - or perhaps disk > > longevity advantage - to using apmd? > > Spinning up a drive over and over is the quickest way to destroy drives. Good to know. We leave _all_ our systems booted _all_ the time... That might explain why we have gotten such unusual service from our drives - not one has gone bad since we started nearly seven years ago! And that's from mostly IDE drives, many of which were used when we got em! (We don't have too many SCSI drives around here. -shrug- ) > The biggest consumer of power in a PC setup is almost always the monitors. Monitors? Aren't they big lizards? ....OH!.... -smile- you mean CRTs! Don't use em... We get into the boxes through the net. > Set everything up for DPMS and you'll save a lot of power, far more than > APM could ever save you. DPMS - some kind of power management system I must be ignorant of... I don't find anything called DPMS on my systems... -shrug- > If you *really* want to save power, you design servers from the beginning > by picking power efficient components, underclocking, etc. > > -Dan > Yeah. We have unplugged/removed all the devices we don't typically use from most of the systems - video cards, and the like. We even unplug the floppy drives! Hey, we're not going to use em at all! And if we need to, we know how to plug em back in again, 'course! Thanks for the reply, Dan. Richard _______________________________________________ Redhat-devel-list mailing list Redhat-devel-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
