Re: power down hard drives

[Austin S. Hemmelgarn]

On 2017-11-13 14:51, Jon LaBadie wrote:

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 02:04:42PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:

On Monday 13 November 2017 13:42:13 Jon LaBadie wrote:


On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:40:17AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

On 2017-11-13 11:11, Gene Heskett wrote:

On Monday 13 November 2017 10:12:47 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:

On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:

Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.

So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
inactive drives.

Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
when needed, powered up and mounted again?

I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
and its other drives still need to be active.

Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
up and things proceeded normally.

That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
be mimiced.


Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the
standby timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the
numbers are not exactly sensible), you may consider looking
into auto-mounting each of the drives, as that can help
eliminate things that would keep the drives on-line (or make
it more obvious that something is still using them).


...


But if I allow the 2TB to be  unmounted and self-powered down,
once daily, what shortening of its life would I be subjected to?
In other words, how many start-stop cycles can it survive?


It's hard to be certain.  For what it's worth though, you might want
to test this to be certain that it's actually going to save you
energy.  It takes a lot of power to get the platters up to speed,
but it doesn't take much to keep them running at that speed.  It
might be more advantageous to just configure the device to idle
(that is, park the heads) after some time out and leave the platters
spinning instead of spinning down completely (and it should result
in less wear on the spindle motor).


In my situation, each of the six data drives is only
needed for a 2 week period out of each 12 weeks.  Once
shutdown, it could be down for 10 weeks.

Jon


Which is more than enough time for stiction to appear if the heads are
not parked off disk.


Don't today's drives automatically park heads?
I don't think there were ever any (at least, not ATA or SAS) that didn't 
when they went into standby.  In fact, I've never seen a modern style 
hard disk with 'voice coil' style actuators that didn't automatically 
park the heads (and part of my job is tearing apart old hard drives 
prior to physical media destruction, so I've seen my fair share of them).

Re: power down hard drives

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 13 November 2017 14:51:59 Jon LaBadie wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 02:04:42PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Monday 13 November 2017 13:42:13 Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:40:17AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn 
wrote:
> > > > On 2017-11-13 11:11, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > > On Monday 13 November 2017 10:12:47 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > > > > > On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > > > > On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn 
wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard
> > > > > > > > > drives dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are
> > > > > > > > > typically used (holding and one vtape drive) during an
> > > > > > > > > amdump run. Even then, the usage is only for about 3
> > > > > > > > > hours.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear
> > > > > > > > > for inactive drives.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
> > > > > > > > > when needed, powered up and mounted again?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
> > > > > > > > > and its other drives still need to be active.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
> > > > > > > > > external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
> > > > > > > > > on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
> > > > > > > > > be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
> > > > > > > > > up and things proceeded normally.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
> > > > > > > > > be mimiced.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set
> > > > > > > > the standby timeout, check the man page for hdparam as
> > > > > > > > the numbers are not exactly sensible), you may consider
> > > > > > > > looking into auto-mounting each of the drives, as that
> > > > > > > > can help eliminate things that would keep the drives
> > > > > > > > on-line (or make it more obvious that something is still
> > > > > > > > using them).
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > > But if I allow the 2TB to be  unmounted and self-powered down,
> > > > > once daily, what shortening of its life would I be subjected
> > > > > to? In other words, how many start-stop cycles can it survive?
> > > >
> > > > It's hard to be certain.  For what it's worth though, you might
> > > > want to test this to be certain that it's actually going to save
> > > > you energy.  It takes a lot of power to get the platters up to
> > > > speed, but it doesn't take much to keep them running at that
> > > > speed.  It might be more advantageous to just configure the
> > > > device to idle (that is, park the heads) after some time out and
> > > > leave the platters spinning instead of spinning down completely
> > > > (and it should result in less wear on the spindle motor).
> > >
> > > In my situation, each of the six data drives is only
> > > needed for a 2 week period out of each 12 weeks.  Once
> > > shutdown, it could be down for 10 weeks.
> > >
> > > Jon
> >
> > Which is more than enough time for stiction to appear if the heads
> > are not parked off disk.
>
> Don't today's drives automatically park heads?
>
> jl
Some may, but with improved control over surface smoothness, I suspect 
few are. In those I've taken apart, I have yet to find a parking ramp 
that lifted the heads clear of the disk when brought to the edge of the 
disk.


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: power down hard drives

[Jon LaBadie]

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 02:04:42PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 13 November 2017 13:42:13 Jon LaBadie wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:40:17AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > > On 2017-11-13 11:11, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > On Monday 13 November 2017 10:12:47 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > > > > On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > > > > > > On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > > > > > > > Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
> > > > > > > > dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
> > > > > > > > used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
> > > > > > > > Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
> > > > > > > > inactive drives.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
> > > > > > > > when needed, powered up and mounted again?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
> > > > > > > > and its other drives still need to be active.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
> > > > > > > > external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
> > > > > > > > on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
> > > > > > > > be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
> > > > > > > > up and things proceeded normally.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
> > > > > > > > be mimiced.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the
> > > > > > > standby timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the
> > > > > > > numbers are not exactly sensible), you may consider looking
> > > > > > > into auto-mounting each of the drives, as that can help
> > > > > > > eliminate things that would keep the drives on-line (or make
> > > > > > > it more obvious that something is still using them).
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > But if I allow the 2TB to be  unmounted and self-powered down,
> > > > once daily, what shortening of its life would I be subjected to? 
> > > > In other words, how many start-stop cycles can it survive?
> > >
> > > It's hard to be certain.  For what it's worth though, you might want
> > > to test this to be certain that it's actually going to save you
> > > energy.  It takes a lot of power to get the platters up to speed,
> > > but it doesn't take much to keep them running at that speed.  It
> > > might be more advantageous to just configure the device to idle
> > > (that is, park the heads) after some time out and leave the platters
> > > spinning instead of spinning down completely (and it should result
> > > in less wear on the spindle motor).
> >
> > In my situation, each of the six data drives is only
> > needed for a 2 week period out of each 12 weeks.  Once
> > shutdown, it could be down for 10 weeks.
> >
> > Jon
> 
> Which is more than enough time for stiction to appear if the heads are 
> not parked off disk.
> 
Don't today's drives automatically park heads?

jl
-- 
Jon H. LaBadie j...@jgcomp.com
 11226 South Shore Rd.  (703) 787-0688 (H)
 Reston, VA  20190  (703) 935-6720 (C)

Re: power down hard drives

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 13 November 2017 13:42:13 Jon LaBadie wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:40:17AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > On 2017-11-13 11:11, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > On Monday 13 November 2017 10:12:47 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > > > On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > > On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > > > > > On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > > > > > > Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
> > > > > > > dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
> > > > > > > used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
> > > > > > > Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
> > > > > > > inactive drives.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
> > > > > > > when needed, powered up and mounted again?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
> > > > > > > and its other drives still need to be active.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
> > > > > > > external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
> > > > > > > on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
> > > > > > > be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
> > > > > > > up and things proceeded normally.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
> > > > > > > be mimiced.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the
> > > > > > standby timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the
> > > > > > numbers are not exactly sensible), you may consider looking
> > > > > > into auto-mounting each of the drives, as that can help
> > > > > > eliminate things that would keep the drives on-line (or make
> > > > > > it more obvious that something is still using them).
>
> ...
>
> > > But if I allow the 2TB to be  unmounted and self-powered down,
> > > once daily, what shortening of its life would I be subjected to? 
> > > In other words, how many start-stop cycles can it survive?
> >
> > It's hard to be certain.  For what it's worth though, you might want
> > to test this to be certain that it's actually going to save you
> > energy.  It takes a lot of power to get the platters up to speed,
> > but it doesn't take much to keep them running at that speed.  It
> > might be more advantageous to just configure the device to idle
> > (that is, park the heads) after some time out and leave the platters
> > spinning instead of spinning down completely (and it should result
> > in less wear on the spindle motor).
>
> In my situation, each of the six data drives is only
> needed for a 2 week period out of each 12 weeks.  Once
> shutdown, it could be down for 10 weeks.
>
> Jon

Which is more than enough time for stiction to appear if the heads are 
not parked off disk.


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: power down hard drives

[Jon LaBadie]

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:40:17AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2017-11-13 11:11, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Monday 13 November 2017 10:12:47 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > 
> > > On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> > > > > On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > > > > > Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
> > > > > > dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
> > > > > > used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
> > > > > > Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
> > > > > > inactive drives.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
> > > > > > when needed, powered up and mounted again?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
> > > > > > and its other drives still need to be active.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
> > > > > > external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
> > > > > > on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
> > > > > > be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
> > > > > > up and things proceeded normally.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
> > > > > > be mimiced.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the standby
> > > > > timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the numbers are not
> > > > > exactly sensible), you may consider looking into auto-mounting each
> > > > > of the drives, as that can help eliminate things that would keep
> > > > > the drives on-line (or make it more obvious that something is still
> > > > > using them).
> > > > 
...
> > 
> > But if I allow the 2TB to be  unmounted and self-powered down, once
> > daily, what shortening of its life would I be subjected to?  In other
> > words, how many start-stop cycles can it survive?
> >
> It's hard to be certain.  For what it's worth though, you might want to test
> this to be certain that it's actually going to save you energy.  It takes a
> lot of power to get the platters up to speed, but it doesn't take much to
> keep them running at that speed.  It might be more advantageous to just
> configure the device to idle (that is, park the heads) after some time out
> and leave the platters spinning instead of spinning down completely (and it
> should result in less wear on the spindle motor).
> > 
In my situation, each of the six data drives is only
needed for a 2 week period out of each 12 weeks.  Once
shutdown, it could be down for 10 weeks.

Jon
-- 
Jon H. LaBadie j...@jgcomp.com
 11226 South Shore Rd.  (703) 787-0688 (H)
 Reston, VA  20190  (703) 935-6720 (C)

Re: power down hard drives

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 13 November 2017 11:40:17 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

> On 2017-11-13 11:11, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Monday 13 November 2017 10:12:47 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> >> On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >>> On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
>  On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
> > dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
> > used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
> > Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.
> >
> > So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
> > inactive drives.
> >
> > Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
> > when needed, powered up and mounted again?
> >
> > I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
> > and its other drives still need to be active.
> >
> > Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
> > external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
> > on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
> > be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
> > up and things proceeded normally.
> >
> > That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
> > be mimiced.
> 
>  Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the
>  standby timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the numbers
>  are not exactly sensible), you may consider looking into
>  auto-mounting each of the drives, as that can help eliminate
>  things that would keep the drives on-line (or make it more
>  obvious that something is still using them).
> >>>
> >>> I've investigated that, and I have amanda wrapped up in a script
> >>> that could do that, but ran into a showstopper I've long since
> >>> forgotten about.  Al this was back in the time I was writing that
> >>> wrapper, years ago now. One of the show stoppers AIR was the fact
> >>> that only root can mount and unmount a drive, and my script runs
> >>> as amanda.
> >>
> >> While such a wrapper might work if you use sudo inside it (you can
> >> configure sudo to allow root to run things as the amanda user
> >> without needing a password, then run the wrapper as root), what I
> >> was trying to refer to in a system-agnostic manner (since the exact
> >> mechanism is different between different UNIX derivatives) was
> >> on-demand auto-mounting, as provided by autofs on Linux or the
> >> auto-mount daemon (amd) on BSD.  When doing on-demand
> >> auto-mounting, you don't need a wrapper at all, as the access
> >> attempt will trigger the mount, and then the mount will time out
> >> after some period of inactivity and be unmounted again.  It's
> >> mostly used for network resources (possibly with special
> >> auto-lookup mechanisms), as certain protocols (NFS in particular)
> >> tend to have issues if the server goes down while a share is
> >> mounted remotely, even if nothing is happening on that share, but
> >> it works just as well for auto-mounting of local fixed or removable
> >> volumes that aren't needed all the time (I use it for a handful of
> >> things on my personal systems to minimize idle resource usage).
> >
> > Sounds good perhaps. I am currently up to my eyeballs in an
> > unrelated problem, and I won't get to this again until that project
> > is completed and I have brought the 2TB drive in and configured it
> > for amanda's usage. That will tend to enforce my one thing at a time
> > but do it right bent. :)  What I have is working for a loose
> > definition of working...
>
> Yeah, I know what that's like.  Prior to switching to amanda where I
> worked, we had a home-grown backup system that had all kinds of odd
> edge cases I had to make sure never happened.  I'm extremely glad we
> decided to stop using that, since it means I can now focus on more
> interesting problems (in theory at least, we're having an issue with
> our Amanda config right now too, but thankfully it's not a huge one).
>
> > But if I allow the 2TB to be  unmounted and self-powered down, once
> > daily, what shortening of its life would I be subjected to?  In
> > other words, how many start-stop cycles can it survive?
>
> It's hard to be certain.  For what it's worth though, you might want
> to test this to be certain that it's actually going to save you
> energy.  It takes a lot of power to get the platters up to speed, but
> it doesn't take much to keep them running at that speed.  It might be
> more advantageous to just configure the device to idle (that is, park
> the heads) after some time out and leave the platters spinning instead
> of spinning down completely (and it should result in less wear on the
> spindle motor).
>
> > Interesting, I had started a long time test yesterday, and the
> > reported hours has wrapped in the report, apparently at 65636 hours.
> > Somebody apparently didn't expect a drive to last that long? ;-) 
> > The drive? Healthy as c

Re: power down hard drives

[Austin S. Hemmelgarn]

On 2017-11-13 11:11, Gene Heskett wrote:

On Monday 13 November 2017 10:12:47 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:


On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:

On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:

Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.

So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
inactive drives.

Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
when needed, powered up and mounted again?

I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
and its other drives still need to be active.

Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
up and things proceeded normally.

That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
be mimiced.


Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the standby
timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the numbers are not
exactly sensible), you may consider looking into auto-mounting each
of the drives, as that can help eliminate things that would keep
the drives on-line (or make it more obvious that something is still
using them).


I've investigated that, and I have amanda wrapped up in a script
that could do that, but ran into a showstopper I've long since
forgotten about.  Al this was back in the time I was writing that
wrapper, years ago now. One of the show stoppers AIR was the fact
that only root can mount and unmount a drive, and my script runs as
amanda.


While such a wrapper might work if you use sudo inside it (you can
configure sudo to allow root to run things as the amanda user without
needing a password, then run the wrapper as root), what I was trying
to refer to in a system-agnostic manner (since the exact mechanism is
different between different UNIX derivatives) was on-demand
auto-mounting, as provided by autofs on Linux or the auto-mount daemon
(amd) on BSD.  When doing on-demand auto-mounting, you don't need a
wrapper at all, as the access attempt will trigger the mount, and then
the mount will time out after some period of inactivity and be
unmounted again.  It's mostly used for network resources (possibly
with special auto-lookup mechanisms), as certain protocols (NFS in
particular) tend to have issues if the server goes down while a share
is mounted remotely, even if nothing is happening on that share, but
it works just as well for auto-mounting of local fixed or removable
volumes that aren't needed all the time (I use it for a handful of
things on my personal systems to minimize idle resource usage).


Sounds good perhaps. I am currently up to my eyeballs in an unrelated
problem, and I won't get to this again until that project is completed
and I have brought the 2TB drive in and configured it for amanda's
usage. That will tend to enforce my one thing at a time but do it right
bent. :)  What I have is working for a loose definition of working...
Yeah, I know what that's like.  Prior to switching to amanda where I 
worked, we had a home-grown backup system that had all kinds of odd edge 
cases I had to make sure never happened.  I'm extremely glad we decided 
to stop using that, since it means I can now focus on more interesting 
problems (in theory at least, we're having an issue with our Amanda 
config right now too, but thankfully it's not a huge one).


But if I allow the 2TB to be  unmounted and self-powered down, once
daily, what shortening of its life would I be subjected to?  In other
words, how many start-stop cycles can it survive?
It's hard to be certain.  For what it's worth though, you might want to 
test this to be certain that it's actually going to save you energy.  It 
takes a lot of power to get the platters up to speed, but it doesn't 
take much to keep them running at that speed.  It might be more 
advantageous to just configure the device to idle (that is, park the 
heads) after some time out and leave the platters spinning instead of 
spinning down completely (and it should result in less wear on the 
spindle motor).


Interesting, I had started a long time test yesterday, and the reported
hours has wrapped in the report, apparently at 65636 hours. Somebody
apparently didn't expect a drive to last that long? ;-)  The drive?
Healthy as can be.
That's about 7.48 years, so I can actually somewhat understand not going 
past 16-bits for that since most people don't use a given disk for more 
than about 5 years worth of power-on time before replacing it.  However, 
what matters is really not how long the device has been powered on, but 
how much abuse the drive has taken.  Running 24/7 for 5 years with no 
movement of the system (including nothing like earthquakes), in a 
temperature, humidity, and pressure controlled room will get yo

Re: power down hard drives

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 13 November 2017 10:12:47 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

> On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> >> On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> >>> Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
> >>> dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
> >>> used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
> >>> Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.
> >>>
> >>> So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
> >>> inactive drives.
> >>>
> >>> Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
> >>> when needed, powered up and mounted again?
> >>>
> >>> I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
> >>> and its other drives still need to be active.
> >>>
> >>> Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
> >>> external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
> >>> on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
> >>> be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
> >>> up and things proceeded normally.
> >>>
> >>> That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
> >>> be mimiced.
> >>
> >> Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the standby
> >> timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the numbers are not
> >> exactly sensible), you may consider looking into auto-mounting each
> >> of the drives, as that can help eliminate things that would keep
> >> the drives on-line (or make it more obvious that something is still
> >> using them).
> >
> > I've investigated that, and I have amanda wrapped up in a script
> > that could do that, but ran into a showstopper I've long since
> > forgotten about.  Al this was back in the time I was writing that
> > wrapper, years ago now. One of the show stoppers AIR was the fact
> > that only root can mount and unmount a drive, and my script runs as
> > amanda.
>
> While such a wrapper might work if you use sudo inside it (you can
> configure sudo to allow root to run things as the amanda user without
> needing a password, then run the wrapper as root), what I was trying
> to refer to in a system-agnostic manner (since the exact mechanism is
> different between different UNIX derivatives) was on-demand
> auto-mounting, as provided by autofs on Linux or the auto-mount daemon
> (amd) on BSD.  When doing on-demand auto-mounting, you don't need a
> wrapper at all, as the access attempt will trigger the mount, and then
> the mount will time out after some period of inactivity and be
> unmounted again.  It's mostly used for network resources (possibly
> with special auto-lookup mechanisms), as certain protocols (NFS in
> particular) tend to have issues if the server goes down while a share
> is mounted remotely, even if nothing is happening on that share, but
> it works just as well for auto-mounting of local fixed or removable
> volumes that aren't needed all the time (I use it for a handful of
> things on my personal systems to minimize idle resource usage).

Sounds good perhaps. I am currently up to my eyeballs in an unrelated 
problem, and I won't get to this again until that project is completed 
and I have brought the 2TB drive in and configured it for amanda's 
usage. That will tend to enforce my one thing at a time but do it right 
bent. :)  What I have is working for a loose definition of working...

But if I allow the 2TB to be  unmounted and self-powered down, once 
daily, what shortening of its life would I be subjected to?  In other 
words, how many start-stop cycles can it survive? 

Interesting, I had started a long time test yesterday, and the reported 
hours has wrapped in the report, apparently at 65636 hours. Somebody 
apparently didn't expect a drive to last that long? ;-)  The drive? 
Healthy as can be.
 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: power down hard drives

[Austin S. Hemmelgarn]

On 2017-11-13 09:56, Gene Heskett wrote:

On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:


On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:

Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.

So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
inactive drives.

Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
when needed, powered up and mounted again?

I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
and its other drives still need to be active.

Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
up and things proceeded normally.

That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
be mimiced.


Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the standby
timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the numbers are not exactly
sensible), you may consider looking into auto-mounting each of the
drives, as that can help eliminate things that would keep the drives
on-line (or make it more obvious that something is still using them).


I've investigated that, and I have amanda wrapped up in a script that
could do that, but ran into a showstopper I've long since forgotten
about.  Al this was back in the time I was writing that wrapper, years
ago now. One of the show stoppers AIR was the fact that only root can
mount and unmount a drive, and my script runs as amanda.

While such a wrapper might work if you use sudo inside it (you can 
configure sudo to allow root to run things as the amanda user without 
needing a password, then run the wrapper as root), what I was trying to 
refer to in a system-agnostic manner (since the exact mechanism is 
different between different UNIX derivatives) was on-demand 
auto-mounting, as provided by autofs on Linux or the auto-mount daemon 
(amd) on BSD.  When doing on-demand auto-mounting, you don't need a 
wrapper at all, as the access attempt will trigger the mount, and then 
the mount will time out after some period of inactivity and be unmounted 
again.  It's mostly used for network resources (possibly with special 
auto-lookup mechanisms), as certain protocols (NFS in particular) tend 
to have issues if the server goes down while a share is mounted 
remotely, even if nothing is happening on that share, but it works just 
as well for auto-mounting of local fixed or removable volumes that 
aren't needed all the time (I use it for a handful of things on my 
personal systems to minimize idle resource usage).

Re: power down hard drives

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 13 November 2017 07:19:45 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

> On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
> > dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
> > used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
> > Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.
> >
> > So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
> > inactive drives.
> >
> > Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
> > when needed, powered up and mounted again?
> >
> > I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
> > and its other drives still need to be active.
> >
> > Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
> > external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
> > on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
> > be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
> > up and things proceeded normally.
> >
> > That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
> > be mimiced.
>
> Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the standby
> timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the numbers are not exactly
> sensible), you may consider looking into auto-mounting each of the
> drives, as that can help eliminate things that would keep the drives
> on-line (or make it more obvious that something is still using them).

I've investigated that, and I have amanda wrapped up in a script that 
could do that, but ran into a showstopper I've long since forgotten 
about.  Al this was back in the time I was writing that wrapper, years 
ago now. One of the show stoppers AIR was the fact that only root can 
mount and unmount a drive, and my script runs as amanda.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: power down hard drives

[Austin S. Hemmelgarn]

On 2017-11-11 01:49, Jon LaBadie wrote:

Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.

So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
inactive drives.

Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
when needed, powered up and mounted again?

I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
and its other drives still need to be active.

Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
up and things proceeded normally.

That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
be mimiced.
Aside from what Stefan mentioned (using hdparam to set the standby 
timeout, check the man page for hdparam as the numbers are not exactly 
sensible), you may consider looking into auto-mounting each of the 
drives, as that can help eliminate things that would keep the drives 
on-line (or make it more obvious that something is still using them).

Re: power down hard drives

[Gene Heskett]

On Saturday 11 November 2017 01:49:25 Jon LaBadie wrote:

> Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
> dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
> used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
> Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.
>
> So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
> inactive drives.
>
> Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
> when needed, powered up and mounted again?
>
> I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
> and its other drives still need to be active.
>
> Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
> external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
> on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
> be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
> up and things proceeded normally.
>
> That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
> be mimiced.
>
> Jon

Hi Jon and Gundy;

This might be nice, but is it balanced with the life of the drive when 
it is only spun down from a power failure long enough to use up the UPS?
Or when powerdown maintenance is being done.

The drives in this box are all 5+ years old, and the drive I use for 
vtapes is the oldest.

SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 10
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME  FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE  UPDATED  
WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f   119   099   006Pre-fail  Always   
-   210441924
  3 Spin_Up_Time0x0003   100   100   000Pre-fail  Always   
-   0
  4 Start_Stop_Count0x0032   100   100   020Old_age   Always   
-   378
  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   036Pre-fail  Always   
-   25
  7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f   082   060   030Pre-fail  Always   
-   179617636
  9 Power_On_Hours  0x0032   023   023   000Old_age   Always   
-   68094
 10 Spin_Retry_Count0x0013   100   100   097Pre-fail  Always   
-   0
 12 Power_Cycle_Count   0x0032   100   100   020Old_age   Always   
-   383
184 End-to-End_Error0x0032   100   100   099Old_age   Always   
-   0
187 Reported_Uncorrect  0x0032   100   100   000Old_age   Always   
-   0
188 Command_Timeout 0x0032   100   099   000Old_age   Always   
-   4
189 High_Fly_Writes 0x003a   001   001   000Old_age   Always   
-   395
190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022   061   057   045Old_age   Always   
-   39 (Min/Max 18/42)
197 Current_Pending_Sector  0x0012   100   100   000Old_age   Always   
-   0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable   0x0010   100   100   000Old_age   Offline  
-   0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count0x003e   200   200   000Old_age   Always   
-   0
240 Head_Flying_Hours   0x   100   253   000Old_age   Offline  
-   68089 (30 52 0)
241 Total_LBAs_Written  0x   100   253   000Old_age   Offline  
-   4258864840
242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x   100   253   000Old_age   Offline  
-   3825606395

SMART Error Log Version: 1
No Errors Logged

SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
Num  Test_DescriptionStatus  Remaining  LifeTime(hours)  
LBA_of_first_error
# 1  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 59921 -
# 2  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 54103 -
# 3  Short offline   Completed without error   00% 45529 -
# 4  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 43537 -
# 5  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 27211 -
# 6  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 27043 -
# 7  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 26875 -
# 8  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 26372 -
# 9  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 26205 -
#10  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 26037 -
#11  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 25869 -
#12  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 25701 -
#13  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 25534 -
#14  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 25368 -
#15  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 25201 -
#16  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 25033 -
#17  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 24866 -
#18  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 24697 -
#19  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 24530 -
#20  Extended offlineCompleted without error   00% 24362 -
#21  Extended offlineCompleted without error 

Re: power down hard drives

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2017-11-11 um 07:49 schrieb Jon LaBadie:

Just a thought.  My amanda server has seven hard drives
dedicated to saving amanda data.  Only 2 are typically
used (holding and one vtape drive) during an amdump run.
Even then, the usage is only for about 3 hours.

So there is a lot of electricity and disk drive wear for
inactive drives.

Can todays drives be unmounted and powered down then
when needed, powered up and mounted again?

I'm not talking about system hibernation, the system
and its other drives still need to be active.

Back when 300GB was a big drive I had 2 of them in
external USB housings.  They shut themselves down
on inactivity.  When later accessed, there would
be about 5-10 seconds delay while the drive spun
up and things proceeded normally.

That would be a fine arrangement now if it could
be mimiced


example: hdparm -S 120 /dev/sdb