On 12/17/2009 04:28 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2009/12/16 Eric Sandeen<sandeen(a)redhat.com>:
>> Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>> I've got a home database/symfony env/etc../file server. It's based
>>> Intel D945GCLF2D Atom board. I've got a two hard drives WD Green Power
>>> connected through Sata. First drive has / and /home filesystem, second
>>> has /home/samba4. On the first drive there are two directories
>>> /home/samba2 and /home/samba3 where I'm mounting ecryptfs.
>>> /home/samba4 is also crypted by default.
>>> I'm wondering if there is a safe way for such configuration to put
>>> second harddrive into sleep (or both drives) after some idle time?
>>> After some googling I've found some resolutions (haven't tested any
>>> these yet):
>>> - hdparm -S
>> I use this for the data drive on my mythbox. I just put this in my
>> /etc/rc.local -
>> # Spin down in 1 hours idle time
>> hdparm -S 240 /dev/sda
> Have you used this for a disk with your rootfs?
In the past I have, but lately getting the root to actually get idle
is just about impossible it seems. I now have an ssd root and
Hm, have you tried running the diskdevstat available in tuned-utils? It
should give you a pretty good idea whats causing the most wakeups.
And if you find any, could you please open bugzillas for them and add
them to the wakeup tracker for drivers:
Also, are you using a fresh install with relatime active for your system
partitions? I've personally seen quite a difference if relatime was
active as we do have occasional reads on idle systems that previously
caused metadata writes due to atime changes.
>> (yeah, oddly, sda is not my boot drive) :)
>>> - sdparm --set=STANDBY
>>> - and laptop_tools
>>> I'm really not convinced that these methods are safe for my
>>> configuration. Anyone have tried this before?
>> Yep. What kind of safety are you worried about?
> I know that ecryptfs is just fs stack on top of my ext3 partition, but
> still I care about data integrity.
Ok but what does that have to do with spinning down a disk? :)
>> It should just work,
>> although you want a long enough idle time that you're not constantly
>> spinning the disk up and down.
> Actually /home/samba4 is not mounted all the time - I'm umountig this
> fs when I'm not using it. I'm wondering if there will be any problems
> with data integrity when I forgot to umount ecryptfs and disk will be
I don't think so. Any access should just spin up the disk and carry on.
>> Is there any nice user-friendly frontend to set this? It'd be nice
>> to expose more power management choices to the users (for anything
>> that can't be easily defaulted, that is).
Philipp Knirsch | Tel.: +49-711-96437-470
Supervisor Core Services | Fax.: +49-711-96437-111
Red Hat GmbH | Email: Phil Knirsch <pknirsch(a)redhat.com>
Hauptstaetterstr. 58 | Web: http://www.redhat.com/
D-70178 Stuttgart, Germany
Motd: You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.