On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Harald Staub wrote: > This is probably stupid, but I am quite happy with the following > "solution". I hacked the source. The 5 second commit interval is hardcoded > in > > fs/jbd/journal.c: > > journal->j_commit_interval = (HZ * 5); > > I changed 5 to 300. What I think this means is that I may loose 5 minutes > of work, which is acceptible for me, but crash recovery is fast. Since I > have crashes only when experimenting with the kernel, I think this is not > as bad as it might look at first glance. But, you know, no guarantees of > mine, your filesystem might become garbled, your hard disk might become > fried!
I don't know if it is very sensible to spin down a disc for 5 minutes from the standpoint of the disc. As a rule of thumb for harddrives, I always thought you should not bother spinning down a disc, if you were going to use it in the next hour anyway. Also, this topic was geared towards ext3 and powersaving and spinning up discs also consumes some power. I am wondering if the 5 minutes of powersaving outweighs the batteryconsumption required when spinning it back up. I'm using ext2 and killed the -- MARK -- messages in syslog along with tuning exim's cronjob, I can work for hours (remotely) without any HD access. If I would be using lots of local apps I wouldn't bother spinning down the disc bc of disc-lifetime considerations and maybe powerconsumption as well. Does anyone else have input on this? Regards, Arjen
