On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:45:10 +0200 Dan Naumov wrote:
> This discussion made me have a look at my 2tb WD Green disks...
So did I. Hm, it's a "nice" feature:
-
Model Family: Western Digital RE2-GP family
Device Model: WDC WD1000FYPS-01ZKB0
Firmware Version: 02.01B01
User Capacity:1
on 27/01/2010 22:26 Tommi Lätti said the following:
> Seems that the performance is indeed atrocious. I recently (like 2
> days ago) had to rescue my zfs pool under opensolaris to spare disks.
> The performance under OpenSol was what I was expecting, 70MB/s reading
> and writing at the same time.
>
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:25:58PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2010-01-27 00:15, Dan Naumov wrote:
> Sorry to bump into this thread so late, but for some of my servers I
> have been using a patch for atacontrol, to turn the APM features of the
> disk(s) off, for a long time. This is mostly n
Seems that the performance is indeed atrocious. I recently (like 2
days ago) had to rescue my zfs pool under opensolaris to spare disks.
The performance under OpenSol was what I was expecting, 70MB/s reading
and writing at the same time.
Now that I'm restoring the stuff back under FreeBSD 8.0-p2 i
On 2010-01-27 00:15, Dan Naumov wrote:
Can anyone confirm that using the WDIDLE3 utility on the 2TB WD20EADS
discs will not cause any issues if these disks are part of a ZFS
mirror pool? I do have backups of data, but I would rather not spend
the time rebuilding the entire system and restoring en
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:12:01 -0500 Damian Gerow
wrote about Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2),
performance issues:
DG> Adrian Wontroba wrote:
DG> Having a script kick off and write to a disk will help so long as that
DG> disk is writable; if it's being used
Here's what I got from one of my 2TB WD green drives. This one
is Firmware 01.00A01. Load_Cycle_Count is 26... seems under
control.
It gets hit with a lot of activity separated by a lot of time
(several minutes to several hours), depending on what is going on.
The box is
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 07:49:05PM -0500, Damian Gerow wrote:
> Specific cases aside, writing to the FS is a workaround to a rather
> inconvenient issue. I, too, would like to see if the problem is fixed, not
> avoided, by using wdidle -- but I suspect I'll have to contact WD myself to
> get that
Dan Naumov wrote:
: >This drive is sitting, unused, with no filesystem, and I've performed
: >approximately zero writes to the disk.
: >
: >Having a script kick off and write to a disk will help so long as that
: >disk is writable; if it's being used as a hot spare in a raidz array, it's
: >not goi
>I have a WD2003FYPS sitting in a system, to be used for testing. Bought it
>just before this thread started, and here's what it looks like right now:
>
> 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age Always -
> 508
>193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 200 200 000Ol
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Now I neither have to worry about premature death of my disks, nor do
I have to endure the loud clicking noises (I have a NAS with these in
my living room)!
If either of you (or both) want me to Paypal you money for a beer,
send me details offlist :)
- Sincerely
Adrian Wontroba wrote:
: How about using the "write every 5 seconds" python script posted earlier
: in this thread by e...@tefre.com? Works nicely for me and stops the load
: cycle count increase.
I have a WD2003FYPS sitting in a system, to be used for testing. Bought it
just before this thread s
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 01:15:17AM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
> Can anyone confirm that using the WDIDLE3 utility on the 2TB WD20EADS
> discs will not cause any issues if these disks are part of a ZFS
> mirror pool? I do have backups of data, but I would rather not spend
> the time rebuilding the ent
Can anyone confirm that using the WDIDLE3 utility on the 2TB WD20EADS
discs will not cause any issues if these disks are part of a ZFS
mirror pool? I do have backups of data, but I would rather not spend
the time rebuilding the entire system and restoring enormous amounts
of data over a 100mbit net
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 03:53:20 +0900 Tommi Lätti wrote about
Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2), performance
issues:
TL> Well AFAIK WD certifies that there's no extra risk involved unless you
TL> go over 300.000 park cycles. On the other hand, my 9 month 1.5tb gree
Hi--
On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:45 AM, Dan Naumov wrote:
> 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age
> Always - 136
> 193 Load_Cycle_Count0x0032 199 199 000Old_age
> Always - 5908
>
> The disks are of exact same model and look to be same
> 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age
> Always - 136
> 193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 199 199 000 Old_age
> Always - 5908
>
> The disks are of exact same model and look to be same firmware. Should
> I be worried that the newer disk has
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:45:10 +0200
Dan Naumov wrote:
> The disks are of exact same model and look to be same firmware. Should
> I be worried that the newer disk has, in 136 hours reached a higher
> Load Cycle count twice as big as on the disk thats 5253 hours old?
There's a similar problem with
> You're welcome. I just feel as bad for you as for everyone else who
> has bought these obviously Windoze optimized harddrives. Unfortunately
> neither wdidle3 nor an updated firmware is available or functioning on
> the latest models in the Green series. At least that's what I've read
> from othe
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:28:58 +0100
Morgan Wesström wrote:
> Garrett Moore wrote:
> > The drives being discussed in my related thread (regarding poor
> > performance) are all WD Green drives. I have used wdidle3 to set
> > all of my drive timeouts to 5 minutes. I'll see what sort of
> > difference
:I'm experiencing the same thing, except in my case it's most noticeable
:when writing to a USB flash drive with a FAT32 filesystem. It slows the
:entire system down, even if the data being written is coming from cache
:or a memory file system.
:
:I don't know if it's related. I'm running 8-ST
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 03:24:49 -0800 Jeremy Chadwick
wrote about Re: immense delayed write to file
system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues:
JC> So which drive models above are experiencing a continual increase in
JC> SMART attribute 193 (Load Cycle Count)? My guess is that some of the
On 01/18/10 22:13, O. Hartmann wrote:
Symptome: All boxes have ZFS and UFS2 filesystems. Since two weeks or
so, sometimes the I/O performance drops massively when doing 'svn
update', 'make world' or even 'make kernel'. It doesn't matter what
memory and how many cpu the box has, it get stuck for s
--On Wednesday, January 20, 2010 1:16 AM +0100 "O. Hartmann"
wrote:
This could end in a bad situation, where one process writes a files, say
with some arbitrary stuff and another successing process is intended to
read this file. even if the processes are run serial, those 'delays'
could bre
On 01/19/10 10:09, krad wrote:
2010/1/18 Morgan Wesstr�m
O. Hartmann wrote:
I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes.
All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two
others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores
(Dell
On 01/18/10 21:34, � wrote:
O. Hartmann wrote:
I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes.
All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two
others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores
(Dell Poweredge III).
Symptome: All
2010/1/19 Daniel O'Connor
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Morgan Wesström wrote:
> > The disks involved don't happen to be Western Digital Green Power
> > disks, do they? The Intelli-Park function in these disks are wrecking
> > havoc with I/O in Linux-land at least, causing massive stalls and
> > iowait
Morgan Wesström wrote:
> Garrett Moore wrote:
>> The drives being discussed in my related thread (regarding poor performance)
>> are all WD Green drives. I have used wdidle3 to set all of my drive timeouts
>> to 5 minutes. I'll see what sort of difference this makes for performance.
>>
>> Even if i
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Gerrit Kühn wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 03:24:49 -0800 Jeremy Chadwick
wrote about Re: immense delayed write to file
system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues:
JC> > JC> If you want a consumer-edition drive that's better tuned for
JC> > JC> server
Hi,
it seems that I'm not experiencing this at all...
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> WD10EACS - WD Caviar Green, 1TB, 16MB, variable rpm
have one (external HDD, "always" powered on)
Model = WDC WD10EAVS-00D7B1
Firmware Version = 01.01A01
Power_On_Hours 5757
Power_Cycle_Count 75
Loa
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:44:59AM -0500, Gary Palmer wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 03:24:49AM -0800, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > WD2001FAAS - WD Caviar Black, 2TB, 64MB, 7200rpm
>
> Do you mean WD2001FASS? I can't find a WD2001FAAS.
Yup, typo -- bound to be at least one given the amount of
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 03:24:49AM -0800, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> WD2001FAAS - WD Caviar Black, 2TB, 64MB, 7200rpm
Do you mean WD2001FASS? I can't find a WD2001FAAS.
Thanks,
Gary
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org
Emil Mikulic wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 09:16:41AM +0100, Gerrit K?hn wrote:
>> Thanks for bringing up this topic here. I have drives showing up close to
>> 80 load cycle counts here. Guess it's time for that fix... :-|
>
> Device Model: WDC WD10EACS-00ZJB0
> Firmware Version: 01.01B
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 09:16:41AM +0100, Gerrit K?hn wrote:
> Thanks for bringing up this topic here. I have drives showing up close to
> 80 load cycle counts here. Guess it's time for that fix... :-|
Device Model: WDC WD10EACS-00ZJB0
Firmware Version: 01.01B01
Serial Number:WD-WCASxx
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 03:24:49 -0800 Jeremy Chadwick
wrote about Re: immense delayed write to file
system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues:
JC> > JC> If you want a consumer-edition drive that's better tuned for
JC> > JC> server work, you should really be looking at the W
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 11:07:24AM +0100, Gerrit Kühn wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:57:36 -0800 Jeremy Chadwick
> wrote about Re: immense delayed write to file
> system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues:
>
> JC> If you want a consumer-edition drive that's better tune
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> No offence intended by this statement, but: the Green drives are
> specifically intended for workstations. I don't believe in the whole
> "segregation of drive model" thing, but the fact of the matter is, the
> Green drives are variable-RPM and have numerous firmware-level
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:57:36 -0800 Jeremy Chadwick
wrote about Re: immense delayed write to file
system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues:
JC> If you want a consumer-edition drive that's better tuned for server
JC> work, you should really be looking at the WD Caviar Black series or
J
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:28:58AM +0100, Morgan Wesström wrote:
> Garrett Moore wrote:
> > The drives being discussed in my related thread (regarding poor performance)
> > are all WD Green drives. I have used wdidle3 to set all of my drive timeouts
> > to 5 minutes. I'll see what sort of differenc
Gerrit Kühn wrote:
> Thanks for bringing up this topic here. I have drives showing up close to
> 80 load cycle counts here. Guess it's time for that fix... :-|
>
Just note that the utility is officially for WD's Raid Edition GP drives
and not for the regular consumer models although some user
2010/1/18 Morgan Wesström
> O. Hartmann wrote:
> > I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes.
> > All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two
> > others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores
> > (Dell Poweredge III).
Garrett Moore wrote:
> The drives being discussed in my related thread (regarding poor performance)
> are all WD Green drives. I have used wdidle3 to set all of my drive timeouts
> to 5 minutes. I'll see what sort of difference this makes for performance.
>
> Even if it makes no difference to perf
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:41:53 -0500 Garrett Moore
wrote about Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2),
performance issues:
GM> The drives being discussed in my related thread (regarding poor
GM> performance) are all WD Green drives. I have used wdidle3 to set all
GM> of
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Garrett Moore wrote:
> The drives being discussed in my related thread (regarding poor
> performance) are all WD Green drives. I have used wdidle3 to set all
> of my drive timeouts to 5 minutes. I'll see what sort of difference
> this makes for performance.
>
> Even if it makes
The drives being discussed in my related thread (regarding poor performance)
are all WD Green drives. I have used wdidle3 to set all of my drive timeouts
to 5 minutes. I'll see what sort of difference this makes for performance.
Even if it makes no difference to performance, thank you for pointing
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Morgan Wesström wrote:
> The disks involved don't happen to be Western Digital Green Power
> disks, do they? The Intelli-Park function in these disks are wrecking
> havoc with I/O in Linux-land at least, causing massive stalls and
> iowait through the roof during the 25-30 seco
O. Hartmann wrote:
> I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes.
> All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two
> others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores
> (Dell Poweredge III).
>
> Symptome: All boxes have ZFS and
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 09:13:52PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote:
> I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64
> boxes. All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP
> system, two others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON
> with 2x 4-cores (Dell Poweredge II
I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes.
All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two
others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores
(Dell Poweredge III).
Symptome: All boxes have ZFS and UFS2 filesystems. Since two
49 matches
Mail list logo
