On Thursday, March 05, 2020 01:56:27 PM Michael Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 10:11:55AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Thursday, March 05, 2020 03:27:09 AM to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:53:12PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> >
On Thu 05 Mar 2020 at 18:01:57 (+), G.W. Haywood wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Mar 2020, 0...@caiway.net wrote:
> > > -dsr- wrote:
> > >
> > > There used to be (still?) a set of Western Digital drives that
> > > would go into a hard sleep and park their heads repeatedly. This
> > > tended to cause a
On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 10:11:55AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, March 05, 2020 03:27:09 AM to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:53:12PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
[...]
> That is lieing to the user, and not nice at all.
Disable your caches! now!
What? Your
Hi there,
On Thu, 5 Mar 2020, 0...@caiway.net wrote:
> -dsr- wrote:
>
> There used to be (still?) a set of Western Digital drives that
> would go into a hard sleep and park their heads repeatedly. This
> tended to cause a shortened lifespan as well as terrible
> performance.
>
with cron:
#
David Wright wrote:
> > Wha not using "hdparm"?
>
> Would you be more specific and include the options you are suggesting.
> There are over 60 available, some dangerous.
I don't use hdparm anymore and can't memorize.
But I'd gone to Google, and they tell me: "hdparm -I /dev/sdX -S 0"
Regards,
On Thu, 2020-03-05 at 11:18 -0600, David Wright wrote:
> On Thu 05 Mar 2020 at 08:26:58 (+0100), Klaus Singvogel wrote:
> > 0...@caiway.net wrote:
> > > with cron:
> > > # prevent disks from sleeping, every minute:
> > > * * * ** /bin/touch /dev/sda &>/
> >
> > Wha not using
On Thu 05 Mar 2020 at 08:26:58 (+0100), Klaus Singvogel wrote:
> 0...@caiway.net wrote:
> > with cron:
> > # prevent disks from sleeping, every minute:
> > * * * ** /bin/touch /dev/sda &>/
>
> Wha not using "hdparm"?
Would you be more specific and include the options you are
On Thursday, March 05, 2020 03:27:09 AM to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:53:12PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > That is lieing to the user, and not nice at all.
>
> Disable your caches! now!
>
> What? Your computer is just 1/3 as fast as it used to be?
>
>
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:53:12PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
[...]
> That is lieing to the user, and not nice at all.
Disable your caches! now!
What? Your computer is just 1/3 as fast as it used to be?
Computing is about lying -- and trying to not get caught.
Cheers
-- t
signature.asc
0...@caiway.net wrote:
> with cron:
> # prevent disks from sleeping, every minute:
> * * * ** /bin/touch /dev/sda &>/
Wha not using "hdparm"?
Regards,
Klaus.
--
Klaus Singvogel
GnuPG-Key-ID: 1024R/5068792D 1994-06-27
> There used to be (still?) a set of Western Digital drives that
> would go into a hard sleep and park their heads repeatedly. This
> tended to cause a shortened lifespan as well as terrible
> performance.
>
> -dsr-
>
with cron:
# prevent disks from sleeping, every minute:
* * * **
On Wednesday 04 March 2020 22:26:34 Michael Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:53:12PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >On Wednesday 04 March 2020 18:49:06 Michael Stone wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:39:51PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> >On Wednesday 04 March 2020 12:48:57
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:53:12PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Wednesday 04 March 2020 18:49:06 Michael Stone wrote:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:39:51PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>On Wednesday 04 March 2020 12:48:57 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
>>* I suspect most of us don't know whether
On 2020-03-04 06:47, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
I guess I'll go with s single SSD onto which I'll copy the data from the
RAID.
I would advise disconnecting the RAID, doing a fresh install onto the
SSD, updating and configuring to suit, reconnecting the RAID, and then
copying data.
Be sure
On Wednesday 04 March 2020 18:49:06 Michael Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:39:51PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >On Wednesday 04 March 2020 12:48:57 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>* I suspect most of us don't know whether our disks are spinning
> >> 24/7 -- some of my computers are
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:39:51PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Wednesday 04 March 2020 12:48:57 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
* I suspect most of us don't know whether our disks are spinning
24/7 -- some of my computers are up 24/7, but I suspect the disks
"spin down" when unused for some
On Wednesday 04 March 2020 12:48:57 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 04, 2020 09:47:47 AM Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> > Gene didn't address my problem, but made the very useful observation
> > that disks spinning 24/7 don't really die. Perhaps I shouldn't worry
> > about replacing
On 3/4/20, Dan Ritter wrote:
> rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
>> some of my computers are up 24/7, but I suspect the disks "spin down" when
>>
>> unused for some period of time
>
> Some do, some don't. Drives sold as "laptop" or "green" drives
> are more likely to do so by themselves.
>
> There used
* On 2020 04 Mar 10:02 -0600, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 02:47:47PM +, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> > Gene didn't address my problem, but made the very useful observation
> > that disks spinning 24/7 don't really die. Perhaps I shouldn't worry
> > about replacing them.
>
>
rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 04, 2020 09:47:47 AM Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> > Gene didn't address my problem, but made the very useful observation
> > that disks spinning 24/7 don't really die. Perhaps I shouldn't worry
> > about replacing them.
>
> I wouldn't count on that,
On Wednesday, March 04, 2020 09:47:47 AM Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> Gene didn't address my problem, but made the very useful observation
> that disks spinning 24/7 don't really die. Perhaps I shouldn't worry
> about replacing them.
I wouldn't count on that, for two reasons:
* everything
Hi there,
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020, grumpy wrote:
if new drive is the same size or larger
install new drive
boot using usb drive, i use systemrescuecd
dd if=old_drive of=new_drive
If there might be any problem with readability on source disc sectors,
then 'ddrescue' is far superior to plain old
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 02:47:47PM +, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
Gene didn't address my problem, but made the very useful observation
that disks spinning 24/7 don't really die. Perhaps I shouldn't worry
about replacing them.
the speed advantages are such that I try to avoid spinning disks
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
On Monday 02 March 2020 06:28:58 Tony van der Hoff wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with
a 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running
fine, I'm becoming a bit concerned about the
On Monday 02 March 2020 06:28:58 Tony van der Hoff wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with
a 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running
fine, I'm becoming a bit concerned about the longevity of this
storage, so I'm planning to
Andy Smith wrote:
Just as you have two HDDs in a RAID array for redundancy, you should
not rely on a single SSD.
If you cannot afford two SSDs then I second the suggestion to
replace one of the HDDs with the SSD and set the HDD write-mostly.
Do also check the exact sector counts as it is
On Lu, 02 mar 20, 10:39:11, Dan Ritter wrote:
>
> file-level copying is better than block-level copying when going
> between drives of different technologies.
+1 on this.
Kind regards,
Andrei
--
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hi Tony,
On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 11:28:58AM +, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> My plan would be to install the SSD in the cage, and dd the contents of the
> array onto the SSD. I would then change the BIOS to boot from the SSD,
> making the RAID array redundant.
Just as you have two HDDs in a
Michael Stone wrote:
> -1, unecessary busy work
+(-1) configurations grown during the years broken - hard to restore
On 3/2/20 6:52 PM, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> Tony van der Hoff writes:
>
>> Hi,
>> I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with
>> a 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running
>> fine, I'm becoming a bit concerned about the longevity of this
>>
On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 02:22:45PM -0500, Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
On 3/2/20 2:19 PM, David Christensen wrote:
On 2020-03-02 03:28, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with
a 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is
On 3/2/20 2:19 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> On 2020-03-02 03:28, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with
>> a 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running
>> fine, I'm becoming a bit concerned about the
On 2020-03-02 03:28, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with a
10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running fine,
I'm becoming a bit concerned about the longevity of this storage, so I'm
planning to upgrade it to
basti wrote:
> Why you do not simply prepare the SSD (partition/align) and after that
> add the SSD as 3rd drive to the raid?
>
> When all is synced you can kick off the HDD's or that them to "Write
> mostly".
+1
However partitioning is still required, but the best way to copy the data is
to
Tony van der Hoff writes:
> Hi,
> I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with
> a 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running
> fine, I'm becoming a bit concerned about the longevity of this
> storage, so I'm planning to upgrade it to a 500GB or
On 02.03.20 16:39, Dan Ritter wrote:
> Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with a
>> 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running fine, I'm
>> becoming a bit concerned about the longevity of this storage, so I'm
Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with a
> 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running fine, I'm
> becoming a bit concerned about the longevity of this storage, so I'm
> planning to upgrade it to a 500GB or
On Monday 02 March 2020 06:28:58 Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with
> a 10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running
> fine, I'm becoming a bit concerned about the longevity of this
> storage, so I'm
Hi,
I'm currently running Buster on a 5 year old GigaByte motherboard with a
10-year old Raid-1 array on 2 500GB disks. Although it is running fine,
I'm becoming a bit concerned about the longevity of this storage, so I'm
planning to upgrade it to a 500GB or maybe 1TB SSD from Crucial.
My
39 matches
Mail list logo
