How to put ethernet hard drive to sleep ??

Discussion in 'Dell' started by James, May 14, 2006.

  1. James

    James Guest

    I have a Dell 8200. I want to use an external, ethernet drive, to use as a
    file server on a home lan network.

    I am hoping to leave this drive on all the time, but I don't want it
    spinning when not in use . As I understand this (not an expert here) an
    ethernet drive is connected to a router, not directly to the pc. Thus, the
    "time management" and similiar controls inherent in XP are not available.

    How can this be done, or can it be done at all ??

    I will appreciate any tips !!

    James, May 14, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. James

    Robert Moir Guest

    This is going to be down to the system you buy and its abilities. You're not
    buying an "ethernet hard disk" even if that is what the box says, you're
    really buying a very basic network file server. Like all servers, this will
    have its own OS with its own abilities, and hopefully that would include
    decent power management.

    Rob Moir, Microsoft MVP
    Blog Site -
    Virtual PC 2004 FAQ -
    I'm always surprised at "professionals" who STILL have to be asked "Have you
    checked (event viewer / syslog)".
    Robert Moir, May 14, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. James

    Tom Scales Guest

    I find it cheaper to just use a PC. I own several 'two generation' ago
    Dells that I have loaded up with storage, a gigabit card and XP. Work like
    a charm. PC itself is in the $100-125 range, which is competitive with any
    of the network storage offerings.

    Tom Scales, May 14, 2006
  4. Any device that you buy will have some sort of sleep mode built into its
    firmware. Like Tom, I too use a little, low power system as a
    file/email server. I went with a Via C3 processor (roughly a P3 800MHz)
    that I bought from newegg which included a flexATX mobo (with integrated
    video & network) for $60. From there I bought a small form factor case
    and standard ATA HDD. I installed Linux (Fedora Core 5) and share
    directories via NFS (I could use Windows Shares aka Samba, but the
    performance sucks compared to NFS). The benefit of going with a full
    system is it's not just a file server; as mentioned I use it as an email
    server (I use fetchmail to collect all my email from yahoo, gmail,
    school, etc. then serve it up via secure IMAP). I also share my music
    over the local network via mt-daapd so any PC running iTunes can see it;
    I use slimserver to serve my music over the Internet for listening at
    Nicholas Andrade, May 14, 2006
  5. James

    HeyBub Guest

    Going back to your original proposition, there are two schools of thought:
    (1) There are only so many revolutions available so turning off the disk
    extends its life, plus "if it ain't in use, turn off the juice" saves power.
    The other idea is that it's the off/on cycling that's more damaging (like
    with light bulbs), plus the power saving is miniscule.

    We have one computer that runs 24/7. Almost all the others are turned off at
    night. By actual measurement, IDE drives last about three years no matter
    their duty cycle.
    HeyBub, May 15, 2006
  6. James

    Ben Myers Guest

    "By actual measurement, IDE drives last about three years no matter their duty
    cycle." A good argument for SCSI drives? ... Ben Myers
    Ben Myers, May 15, 2006
  7. James

    Clint Guest

    How much does a SCSI drive cost per GB compared to IDE? Last time I looked,
    SCSI was about $1 to $1.50/GB for larger drives (147 or larger), and IDE is
    $0.50 to 0.75/GB. If the IDE is half the price per GB, a three year life
    span doesn't seem so bad. Course, a nice SCIS RAID 5 or 10 array, that's
    another story... :) Saved us a few hours of work (and probably some data
    that wasn't being backed up) recently.

    Clint, May 15, 2006
  8. James

    Ron Hardin Guest

    I use a win95 system that's been spinning its HD continuously since 1996
    (check the header to this message). SCSI drive.

    Power is free in the heating season, if you heat with resistive heating,
    by the way. Every watt winds up as a watt of heat in the end.
    Ron Hardin, May 15, 2006
  9. James

    paulmd Guest

    3 years??? Since I work almost exclusively with much older computers, i
    have a fair idea how long electronics will last. I've seen a living
    hard drive pulled out of a 486 that had been "stored" outside long
    term, in the mud, and weather. A very high ratio of 6 year old hard
    drives are still alive (I don't usually go much older because they just
    don't store enough). Hard drives freqently survive mishandling, being
    stacked like bricks, sans astistatic bags and so on.

    Chances are good that if you grab that hard drive out of a dead
    computer of any age, and plug it into a live one, you can still read
    the data.
    paulmd, May 15, 2006
  10. James

    Ben Myers Guest

    Cost of the drive is one factor. Value of the data and time to recover from a
    drive failure are others. One can argue that using an IDE drive is penny-wise
    and pound-foolish... Ben Myers
    Ben Myers, May 15, 2006
  11. James

    Tom Scales Guest

    Oh please. I thought better of you :)

    If you look at MTBF numbers, current SCSI drives are NOT inherently more
    reliable then current IDE drives (PATA or SATA).

    Many SCSI drives are in arrays -- which provides the perceived reliability.

    Don't go with the SCSI-mantra.

    Tom Scales, May 15, 2006
  12. No, a good argument for 5-year warranties and good backups. At the
    3-year point you get a new drive for free, and since you have good
    backups (or a simple RAID array) you don't lose any data. 8*)
    William P.N. Smith, May 15, 2006
  13. Of course if performance is a concern, SCSI is the way to go; find me a
    single PATA or SATA 15K RPM drive
    Nicholas Andrade, May 15, 2006
  14. James

    Tom Scales Guest

    It's not about spindle speed. A SATA Raptor can put up spec numbers as good
    as a 15K SCSI. It's not about specs either.

    And this isn't a server group, remember? How many people here need that

    Tom Scales, May 15, 2006
  15. 5 years ago you would have said 10K RPM, now the Raptors are out. n
    another few years, who knows what we'll see?

    Performance is about more than raw disk speed, which is more than
    spindle speed, of course...
    William P.N. Smith, May 15, 2006
  16. Know of any sites, magazines, etc. that support this claim? We tested
    both for DB oriented tasks at my previous job and the 15K SCSI's smoked
    the SATA Raptors in terms of total throughput (this is on the same Sun
    hardware with fibre connected StorEdge disk arrays using VXFS on both
    sets of RAID-1 drives). The 10K SCSI drives also won out (esp. as load
    increased), however their margin wasn't worth their premium in price.
    I completely agree; I haven't used a SCSI drive in a home system in
    nearly a decade.
    Nicholas Andrade, May 15, 2006
  17. James

    chaz Guest

    That's what I thought too. Three years? Unpossible!! :)
    chaz, May 16, 2006
  18. Hi!
    Don't tell my IDE drives! They apparently don't know!

    The longest running pair I had was in a low-end IBM PC Server. Both were
    Western Digital drives, one 3GB and the other 8. They ran almost nonstop
    from 1997-2004 until a basement flood came along and blew them away. Every
    now and again, if I powered them off for a longer time toward the end of
    their life, they were sometimes slow to spin up but never gave any trouble
    while running. I'd say they would still be running today if the flood hadn't
    come. Probing their SMART status showed no significant display of "grown"
    defects over time. SpinRite (which I swear by after having seen it work,
    though I was skeptical at first) gave them both clean bills of health.

    As far as other drives, I've got a collection of older PCs in active
    service. They're a mix of IDE, SCSI, ESDI and (yes) even MFM/RLL systems. A
    few drives have dropped here and there, but nothing that suggests any one
    type is any worse than another.

    Brands are another story. For me, Western Digital has probably been the most
    reliable, next to my IBM drives. The old Conner drives have been pretty good
    too. Seagate drives seem to do acceptably well and the SCSI ones do seem to
    be somewhat better/heavier made. The only drives I've seen that were
    dismally bad were just about anything that said "Maxtor" (ever read the MTBF
    for the LXT-340a? It's a joke...and too true.) and later Quantum drives. I
    have also noticed that every drive maker has had a bad line of drives that
    just drop dead before they should.

    In any case, backups are always prudent...if not so much to protect against
    hardware failure, then to have a shield from outside disasters or ideas that
    don't turn out to be as good as they should be. :)

    William R. Walsh, May 16, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.