I've thought of a couple of other things we could try. First off, if EXT3 is writing more often than is optimal, could we have reports from people who use other file systems like JFS or XFS or ReiserFS? If changing the file system makes a big difference, it might be a solution. I've read that JFS, XFS and ReiserFS can have superior performance characteristics in many cases, and those who would be impacted by ext3 not being present (system admins who depend on ext3 for specific backup utilities, etc) would probably know enough to select the correct partition type for their unique work at installation.
Also, as a quick and easy test we could try installing powertop from the repositories. When the program boots up (sudo powertop), it gives a bunch of suggestions. We could simply try accepting each one of its suggestions (you can usually make the change by hitting a single key when prompted), and then monitor our hard drives for a few minutes to see how frequently they're loading. This might be a quick way for a number of us to identify what works for our drives without a lot of command line work, which some people might understandably shy away from. These are just a few thoughts, let's see what comes of them! If this doesn't work, perhaps the best thing to do is contact the hard drive manufacturers. After all, they design the drives, and know what sort of behaviour the drives should be exhibiting. All the best, Scott -- High frequency of load/unload cycles on some hard disks may shorten lifetime https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/59695 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
