Re: 2.4 kernel tweaking
On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Harald Staub wrote:
> This is probably stupid, but I am quite happy with the following
> "solution". I hacked the source. The 5 second commit interval is hardcoded
> in
>
> fs/jbd/journal.c:
>
> journal->j_commit_interval = (HZ * 5);
>
> I changed 5 to 300. What I think this means is that I may loose 5 minutes
> of work, which is acceptible for me, but crash recovery is fast. Since I
> have crashes only when experimenting with the kernel, I think this is not
> as bad as it might look at first glance. But, you know, no guarantees of
> mine, your filesystem might become garbled, your hard disk might become
> fried!
I don't know if it is very sensible to spin down a disc for 5 minutes from
the standpoint of the disc. As a rule of thumb for harddrives, I always
thought you should not bother spinning down a disc, if you were going to
use it in the next hour anyway. Also, this topic was geared towards ext3
and powersaving and spinning up discs also consumes some power. I am
wondering if the 5 minutes of powersaving outweighs the batteryconsumption
required when spinning it back up.
I'm using ext2 and killed the -- MARK -- messages in syslog along with
tuning exim's cronjob, I can work for hours (remotely) without any HD
access. If I would be using lots of local apps I wouldn't bother spinning
down the disc bc of disc-lifetime considerations and maybe
powerconsumption as well. Does anyone else have input on this?
Regards,
Arjen
Reply to: