starhubble wrote on 2021-04-22, 09:06:
Okay, so the spindowns: Good or bad? Is it better to have the drive spin constantly or spin down when idle? Someone mentioned that unnecessary spinups might put extra strain on the drive.
I think you have to judge whether it's useful for your application.
On a desktop PC with 1 hard drive, I think it's useless and will only serve to annoy you. If the desktop is actually idle, then I would use standby which will do more than just turn off the hard drive.
In a media center or other home server situation, there will be huge periods of time where the system is running but a drive isn't needed. In that case it makes sense to spin it down IMO because it will dramatically reduce the running hours of the drive. In that situation I think it would extend the drive's life, as long as the change in state doesn't happen very frequently.
On my server (which has multiple drives mostly holding media files) I use a software utility with a delay of something like 30 minutes. A couple drives probably get woken 2-3 times per day, others could go days or weeks between wakeups. Given that schedule I think 30 minutes is fine and keeps a drive from falling asleep if I'm still semi-actively using it.
I had a new 2.5" laptop hard drive in that server at one point. After several months the drive started failing to respond. I dug into the SMART data and realized it had racked up a stupidly high number of start/stop cycles. It was one of those 8-second-wonders. I basically ruined it.
It mostly still works but if it ever parks or spins down then it's always questionable whether it will wake up again. I took it out of the server.
This automatic 8 second behavior on some hard drives I think just parks the heads - not sure if it actually spins down the platters. Maybe it does both with different delays?
I object to the basic idea of this being an internal function of the drive. The job of hardware is to obey commands, not make up it's own.
The only reason for the firmware to do this kind of thing autonomously is if it somehow had better knowledge than the OS of when it made sense to park the heads (or spin down entirely). But reality is the opposite. The hard drive is blind to what's going on in the rest of the system.
The operating system is supposed to operate the hardware and provide the interaction between that hardware and the user. It's talking to everything in the box and knows what's going on with every device, software service, and user. It has lots of RAM, a powerful processor, graphics, and user input devices to make "power management" behavior adjustable and/or intelligent. Software can make these decisions as simple or complex as somebody believes is worthwhile to program.
Instead we have a little microcontroller on the back of a hard drive that has stolen this decision because it thinks it knows best.
I have to assume the reason the manufacturers started doing this was so they could advertise lower power usage. By internalizing power management, they can take credit for it. There might be some regulatory motivations involved also, who knows. It's a specs/marketing gimmick that is simply a regression when compared with the pre-existing ability to implement this behavior in software.
There are some WD drives with this behavior from factory where it can be disabled or at least made to wait longer using "WDIDLE". It doesn't work on the newest drives anymore but it did work for a lot of them in the past.