Re: 2.4 kernel tweaking
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 07:27:20PM +0100, Nyk Tarr wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 12:54:55PM -0400, christophe barbe wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 05:22:45PM +0100, Nyk Tarr wrote:
> > > > In my opinion this is not a solution. First I am still not convinced
> > > > that it is normal for ext3 to touch the disk when there is no other
> > > > activity on the system. Then spinning the disk for 5 minutes seems very
> > > > bad from the powersaving point of view and also from the life of the HD.
> > >
> > > Hard drives sustain most of their wear and use most power on spinning up,
> > > it makes sense for most systems (ie desktops/servers etc) to keep the disks
> > > spinning all the time. In the majority of cases, then, it isn't a case
> > > of 'spinning up' the disks at all. This is not the case on laptops, but
> > > we are a minority case. Optimising the commit intervals has been
> > > suggested on lkml, but is, apparently rather tricky.
> >
> > The commit of what? I don't see why there would be a need to commit
> > something on an idle system. A commit every 5 secondes when the system
> > (and the HD) is used is not a problem.
> >
>
> It seems nothing is committed unless there is a dirty block ie
> something, somewhere has changed, however small or seemingly
> insignificant. It would be pretty difficult to stop _all_ disk activity,
> unless a very high percentage of your processes are running elsewhere -
> something like a ssh to another box with few processes still running
> locally. You'd have to stop *logd for example.
>
> See the discussions at:
Sorry, poorly quoted, try
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=linux.kernel.20011022124751.C5146%40turbolinux.com&rnum=6
>
> and
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=linux.kernel.3CFD453A.B6A43522%40zip.com.au&rnum=1
--
/__
\_|\/
/\
Reply to: