napalm at squareownz
May 10, 2012, 4:55 AM
Post #25 of 51
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 06:58:47PM -0500, Dale wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
> > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Dale <rdalek1967 [at] gmail> wrote:
> >> Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > <SNIP>
> >>> My thoughts these days is that nobody really makes a bad drive anymore.
> >>> Like cars, they're all good and do what it says on the box. Same
> >>> with bikes.
> >>> A manufacturer may have some bad luck and a product range is less than
> >>> perfect, but even that is quite rare and most stuff ups can be fixed
> >>> with new firmware. So it's all good.
> >> That's my thoughts too. It doesn't matter what brand you go with, they
> >> all have some sort of failure at some point. They are not built to last
> >> forever and there is always the random failure, even when a week old.
> >> It's usually the loss of important data and not having a backup that
> >> makes it sooooo bad. I'm not real picky on brand as long as it is a
> >> company I have heard of.
> > One thing to keep in mind is statistics. For a single drive by itself
> > it hardly matters anymore what you buy. You cannot predict the
> > failure. However if you buy multiple identical drives at the same time
> > then most likely you will either get all good drives or (possibly) a
> > bunch of drives that suffer from similar defects and all start failing
> > at the same point in their life cycle. For RAID arrays it's
> > measurably best to buy drives that come from different manufacturing
> > lots, better from different factories, and maybe even from different
> > companies. Then, if a drive fails, assuming the failure is really the
> > fault of the drive and not some local issue like power sources or ESD
> > events, etc., it's less likely other drives in the box will fail at
> > the same time.
> > Cheers,
> > Mark
> You make a good point too. I had a headlight to go out on my car once
> long ago. I, not thinking, replaced them both since the new ones were
> brighter. Guess what, when one of the bulbs blew out, the other was out
> VERY soon after. Now, I replace them but NOT at the same time. Keep in
> mind, just like a hard drive, when one headlight is on, so is the other
> one. When we turn our computers on, all the drives spin up together so
> they are basically all getting the same wear and tear effect.
> I don't use RAID, except to kill bugs, but that is good advice. People
> who do use RAID would be wise to use it.
> :-) :-)
I know that Windows does this by default (it annoys me so I disable it)
but does linux disable or stop running the disks if they're inactive?
I'm assuming there's an option somewhere - maybe just `unmount`!