Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,524
Default OT; Green is not always good.

I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...
In articlesrKdnQox1YQ3MiTQnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...
Canuck57 wrote:
On 28/04/2011 6:53 AM, Harryk wrote:
I'm putting together a new server and was about to order four 2-terabyte
Western Digital "Green" enterprise hard drives for it.

I've never really thought about why these drives are called "green,"
other than they are supposed to use less power than "non-green" drives.
Obviously, they do this by shutting the drive down when it isn't being
accessed.

Apparently, though, when you use "green" drives in a server, you end up
with a dramatically high Load/UnLoad Cycle Count, and this can lead to
premature ejac-, er, drive failure.

There is a way to turn off the "green" on the WD drives, by adjusting
the drive's idle timer to lower the Load/Unload cycle rate, but it is a
pain in the ass, involving preparing a DOS boot disk, installing the
drive in a computer, and running a program. Not difficult, but I don't
have a "Windoze" computer anymore that can boot up into DOS. :)

I'm guessing the "green" drives of other vendors will behave similarly.

Sheesh, I never learned any of this stuff in my college English classes.
Even an O.F. like me is not too old to learn.
Failure of drives is exclusive to the (lack of) quality of the drives.
How much power they use is not a factor. If anything, lower power, less
heat and slower access times for less vibration should actually be better.

I would use Seagate drives. And forget DOS/MS products. Use Linux.
Ubuntu or Fedora. No way to turn off green, they run slower, consume
less juice by design.

Use HW RAID on the boot disks if the mobo supports it.

Oh, just for your edification, I just ordered four Seagate Constellation
ES 2 TB 7200RPM SATA 3Gb/s 64 MB Cache 3.5 Inch Internal Hard Drives,
Model # ST32000644NS.

The new server runs under LINUX, I believe. The company selling them has
a nice interface for it. As for RAID, I'm still deciding what flavor to
use. The vendor has something called Synology Hybrid RAID, about which I
have just started to read. Crikey, it is dull stuff.

You believe??? You bought it and don't know? What a moron!


Harry is building this in his mind as he goes along and google feeds him
his imaginary configuration. It's like the 6 year old in the lunch room
making up new stories every day...snerk


The new server and drives will arrive next week. When I get it and start
populating the drive rack, I'll print up a little "Eat Me, Ingersoll"
card, take a photo, and post it for you.

I see Loogy is butting in again, questioning why I don't know what OS
the server uses.

As I stated, the server comes with a very nice interface, one that
apparently precludes the necessity of typing in commands in the OS,
which *is* Linux. My Macs have an OS based upon Unix, and I can't recall
ever having to go into terminal mode to get something done. The same is
pretty much true with Windows.

So, what difference does it make what the OS is, so long as it is stable
and the interface works properly? Linux, Unix, OS 10.6, Windows, Windows
Server...it really isn't important to me.

For the 1.2 persons out there who give a **** what the interface looks
like...it loads a bit slow, but it is interesting:

http://www.synology.com/us/products/demo/index.php


It's very Windows-like:

http://tinyurl.com/6ebu3es



  #12   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Apr 2011
Posts: 94
Default OT; Green is not always good.

On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 07:09:11 -0400, Harryk
sent the following message
I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...
In articlesrKdnQox1YQ3MiTQnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@earthlink .com,

payer3389
@mypacks.net says...
Canuck57 wrote:
On 28/04/2011 6:53 AM, Harryk wrote:
I'm putting together a new server and was about to order four

2-terabyte
Western Digital "Green" enterprise hard drives for it.

I've never really thought about why these drives are called

"green,"
other than they are supposed to use less power than

"non-green" drives.
Obviously, they do this by shutting the drive down when it

isn't being
accessed.

Apparently, though, when you use "green" drives in a server,

you end up
with a dramatically high Load/UnLoad Cycle Count, and this

can lead to
premature ejac-, er, drive failure.

There is a way to turn off the "green" on the WD drives, by

adjusting
the drive's idle timer to lower the Load/Unload cycle rate,

but it is a
pain in the ass, involving preparing a DOS boot disk,

installing the
drive in a computer, and running a program. Not difficult,

but I don't
have a "Windoze" computer anymore that can boot up into DOS.

:)

I'm guessing the "green" drives of other vendors will behave

similarly.

Sheesh, I never learned any of this stuff in my college

English classes.
Even an O.F. like me is not too old to learn.
Failure of drives is exclusive to the (lack of) quality of the

drives.
How much power they use is not a factor. If anything, lower

power, less
heat and slower access times for less vibration should

actually be better.

I would use Seagate drives. And forget DOS/MS products. Use

Linux.
Ubuntu or Fedora. No way to turn off green, they run slower,

consume
less juice by design.

Use HW RAID on the boot disks if the mobo supports it.

Oh, just for your edification, I just ordered four Seagate

Constellation
ES 2 TB 7200RPM SATA 3Gb/s 64 MB Cache 3.5 Inch Internal Hard

Drives,
Model # ST32000644NS.

The new server runs under LINUX, I believe. The company selling

them has
a nice interface for it. As for RAID, I'm still deciding what

flavor to
use. The vendor has something called Synology Hybrid RAID,

about which I
have just started to read. Crikey, it is dull stuff.
You believe??? You bought it and don't know? What a moron!


Harry is building this in his mind as he goes along and google

feeds him
his imaginary configuration. It's like the 6 year old in the

lunch room
making up new stories every day...snerk



The new server and drives will arrive next week. When I get it and

start
populating the drive rack, I'll print up a little "Eat Me,

Ingersoll"
card, take a photo, and post it for you.



I see Loogy is butting in again, questioning why I don't know what

OS
the server uses.



As I stated, the server comes with a very nice interface, one that
apparently precludes the necessity of typing in commands in the OS,
which *is* Linux. My Macs have an OS based upon Unix, and I can't

recall
ever having to go into terminal mode to get something done. The

same is
pretty much true with Windows.



So, what difference does it make what the OS is, so long as it is

stable
and the interface works properly? Linux, Unix, OS 10.6, Windows,

Windows
Server...it really isn't important to me.



For the 1.2 persons out there who give a **** what the interface

looks
like...it loads a bit slow, but it is interesting:



http://www.synology.com/us/products/demo/index.php




It's very Windows-like:



http://tinyurl.com/6ebu3es


The nuts and bolts of the life of harry krause. How uninteresting. Do
you have anything INTERESTING to share about boating.
  #13   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,909
Default OT; Green is not always good.

wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 08:53:18 -0400,
wrote:

I'm putting together a new server and was about to order four 2-terabyte
Western Digital "Green" enterprise hard drives for it.

I've never really thought about why these drives are called "green,"
other than they are supposed to use less power than "non-green" drives.
Obviously, they do this by shutting the drive down when it isn't being
accessed.

Apparently, though, when you use "green" drives in a server, you end up
with a dramatically high Load/UnLoad Cycle Count, and this can lead to
premature ejac-, er, drive failure.

There is a way to turn off the "green" on the WD drives, by adjusting
the drive's idle timer to lower the Load/Unload cycle rate, but it is a
pain in the ass, involving preparing a DOS boot disk, installing the
drive in a computer, and running a program. Not difficult, but I don't
have a "Windoze" computer anymore that can boot up into DOS. :)

I'm guessing the "green" drives of other vendors will behave similarly.

Sheesh, I never learned any of this stuff in my college English classes.
Even an O.F. like me is not too old to learn.


I imagine when they say "DOS disk" they really are talking about
loading W/D Data Lifeguard tools from a Dr DOS disk. It is self
contained and does not depend on what your normal OS is.
You are just booting it.
You have the same deal with MaxBlast on Maxtor drives or SeaTools on
Seagate drives. The install disk is a self loader. They use Dr DOS
because it can handle NTFS drives right out of the box and the license
is cheaper.
This can also partition, format and clone your drives a lot easier
than Windoze Disk Manager.


That's pretty much it...I decided against these drives, though, and went
with four "non-green" enterprise drives.
  #14   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,868
Default OT; Green is not always good.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

Canuck57 wrote:
On 28/04/2011 6:53 AM, Harryk wrote:
I'm putting together a new server and was about to order four 2-terabyte
Western Digital "Green" enterprise hard drives for it.

I've never really thought about why these drives are called "green,"
other than they are supposed to use less power than "non-green" drives.
Obviously, they do this by shutting the drive down when it isn't being
accessed.

Apparently, though, when you use "green" drives in a server, you end up
with a dramatically high Load/UnLoad Cycle Count, and this can lead to
premature ejac-, er, drive failure.

There is a way to turn off the "green" on the WD drives, by adjusting
the drive's idle timer to lower the Load/Unload cycle rate, but it is a
pain in the ass, involving preparing a DOS boot disk, installing the
drive in a computer, and running a program. Not difficult, but I don't
have a "Windoze" computer anymore that can boot up into DOS. :)

I'm guessing the "green" drives of other vendors will behave similarly.

Sheesh, I never learned any of this stuff in my college English classes.
Even an O.F. like me is not too old to learn.


Failure of drives is exclusive to the (lack of) quality of the drives.
How much power they use is not a factor. If anything, lower power, less
heat and slower access times for less vibration should actually be better.

I would use Seagate drives. And forget DOS/MS products. Use Linux.
Ubuntu or Fedora. No way to turn off green, they run slower, consume
less juice by design.

Use HW RAID on the boot disks if the mobo supports it.



Oh, just for your edification, I just ordered four Seagate Constellation
ES 2 TB 7200RPM SATA 3Gb/s 64 MB Cache 3.5 Inch Internal Hard Drives,
Model # ST32000644NS.

The new server runs under LINUX, I believe. The company selling them has
a nice interface for it. As for RAID, I'm still deciding what flavor to
use. The vendor has something called Synology Hybrid RAID, about which I
have just started to read. Crikey, it is dull stuff.


RAID 5 or RAID 10. Or just buy storage on the Internet. If your purpose
is backup and recovery then having it at home is not what you want. You
can't access it when you go somewhere else.




  #15   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,909
Default OT; Green is not always good.

BAR wrote:
In articlesrKdnQox1YQ3MiTQnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...
Canuck57 wrote:
On 28/04/2011 6:53 AM, Harryk wrote:
I'm putting together a new server and was about to order four 2-terabyte
Western Digital "Green" enterprise hard drives for it.

I've never really thought about why these drives are called "green,"
other than they are supposed to use less power than "non-green" drives.
Obviously, they do this by shutting the drive down when it isn't being
accessed.

Apparently, though, when you use "green" drives in a server, you end up
with a dramatically high Load/UnLoad Cycle Count, and this can lead to
premature ejac-, er, drive failure.

There is a way to turn off the "green" on the WD drives, by adjusting
the drive's idle timer to lower the Load/Unload cycle rate, but it is a
pain in the ass, involving preparing a DOS boot disk, installing the
drive in a computer, and running a program. Not difficult, but I don't
have a "Windoze" computer anymore that can boot up into DOS. :)

I'm guessing the "green" drives of other vendors will behave similarly.

Sheesh, I never learned any of this stuff in my college English classes.
Even an O.F. like me is not too old to learn.
Failure of drives is exclusive to the (lack of) quality of the drives.
How much power they use is not a factor. If anything, lower power, less
heat and slower access times for less vibration should actually be better.

I would use Seagate drives. And forget DOS/MS products. Use Linux.
Ubuntu or Fedora. No way to turn off green, they run slower, consume
less juice by design.

Use HW RAID on the boot disks if the mobo supports it.


Oh, just for your edification, I just ordered four Seagate Constellation
ES 2 TB 7200RPM SATA 3Gb/s 64 MB Cache 3.5 Inch Internal Hard Drives,
Model # ST32000644NS.

The new server runs under LINUX, I believe. The company selling them has
a nice interface for it. As for RAID, I'm still deciding what flavor to
use. The vendor has something called Synology Hybrid RAID, about which I
have just started to read. Crikey, it is dull stuff.


RAID 5 or RAID 10. Or just buy storage on the Internet. If your purpose
is backup and recovery then having it at home is not what you want. You
can't access it when you go somewhere else.


Every single work, photo, music, & movie file on the server will be
accessible to me from "somewhere else."



  #16   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: May 2011
Posts: 17
Default OT; Green is not always good.

Harryk wrote:
BAR wrote:
In articlesrKdnQox1YQ3MiTQnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...
Canuck57 wrote:
On 28/04/2011 6:53 AM, Harryk wrote:
I'm putting together a new server and was about to order four
2-terabyte
Western Digital "Green" enterprise hard drives for it.

I've never really thought about why these drives are called "green,"
other than they are supposed to use less power than "non-green"
drives.
Obviously, they do this by shutting the drive down when it isn't
being
accessed.

Apparently, though, when you use "green" drives in a server, you
end up
with a dramatically high Load/UnLoad Cycle Count, and this can
lead to
premature ejac-, er, drive failure.

There is a way to turn off the "green" on the WD drives, by adjusting
the drive's idle timer to lower the Load/Unload cycle rate, but it
is a
pain in the ass, involving preparing a DOS boot disk, installing the
drive in a computer, and running a program. Not difficult, but I
don't
have a "Windoze" computer anymore that can boot up into DOS. :)

I'm guessing the "green" drives of other vendors will behave
similarly.

Sheesh, I never learned any of this stuff in my college English
classes.
Even an O.F. like me is not too old to learn.
Failure of drives is exclusive to the (lack of) quality of the drives.
How much power they use is not a factor. If anything, lower power,
less
heat and slower access times for less vibration should actually be
better.

I would use Seagate drives. And forget DOS/MS products. Use Linux.
Ubuntu or Fedora. No way to turn off green, they run slower, consume
less juice by design.

Use HW RAID on the boot disks if the mobo supports it.

Oh, just for your edification, I just ordered four Seagate
Constellation
ES 2 TB 7200RPM SATA 3Gb/s 64 MB Cache 3.5 Inch Internal Hard Drives,
Model # ST32000644NS.

The new server runs under LINUX, I believe. The company selling them
has
a nice interface for it. As for RAID, I'm still deciding what flavor to
use. The vendor has something called Synology Hybrid RAID, about
which I
have just started to read. Crikey, it is dull stuff.


RAID 5 or RAID 10. Or just buy storage on the Internet. If your purpose
is backup and recovery then having it at home is not what you want. You
can't access it when you go somewhere else.


Every single work, photo, music, & movie file on the server will be
accessible to me from "somewhere else."

Not if your house burns to the ground.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
green 01 Green Holland from my balcony.JPG (1/1) Bouler[_2_] Tall Ship Photos 12 September 21st 07 01:11 AM
green 04 Green Holland from my balcony.JPG (1/1) Bouler[_2_] Tall Ship Photos 2 September 18th 07 12:32 PM
green 05 Green Holland from my balcony.JPG (1/1) Bouler[_2_] Tall Ship Photos 2 September 17th 07 05:12 PM
green 03 Green Holland from my balcony.JPG (1/1) Bouler[_2_] Tall Ship Photos 0 September 17th 07 01:05 AM
green 02 Green Holland from my balcony.JPG (1/1) Bouler[_2_] Tall Ship Photos 0 September 17th 07 01:05 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017