Longest UPTIME on your destop PC?
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
Longest UPTIME on your destop PC?
Just wondering, how long time have YOU gone without rebooting your home/desktop PC? One guy I know has more than 450 days and counting on his, running CentOS.
I started my quest for something similar, now with a staggering 8+ days and counting.
How about YOU?
Best off-topic regards,
Strid
I started my quest for something similar, now with a staggering 8+ days and counting.
How about YOU?
Best off-topic regards,
Strid
Code: Select all
# Uptime | System Boot up
----------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
1 71 days, 13:33:05 | Linux 2.6.35-rc3 Sat Jun 12 19:51:58 2010
2 32 days, 16:50:50 | Linux 2.6.34-rc5-git8 Thu Apr 29 01:56:35 2010
3 31 days, 19:06:51 | Linux 2.6.33-rc8-git3 Thu Feb 18 17:53:48 2010
Code: Select all
# Uptime | System Boot up
----------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
1 243 days, 02:24:49 | Linux 2.6.27-gentoo-r7 Fri Mar 6 11:07:33 2009
2 171 days, 04:38:39 | Linux 2.6.31-gentoo-r10 Fri Mar 5 03:46:53 2010
3 69 days, 01:27:39 | Linux 2.6.27-gentoo-r7 Wed Nov 4 15:08:28 2009
Code: Select all
# Uptime | System Boot up
----------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
1 191 days, 19:40:40 | Linux 2.6.31-gentoo-r6 Fri Feb 12 12:46:15 2010
2 109 days, 13:08:17 | Linux 2.6.27-gentoo-r8 Wed Apr 1 00:43:30 2009
3 107 days, 14:20:21 | Linux 2.6.27-gentoo-r8 Sun Jul 19 13:55:29 2009
It's called a package manager and a sane design. ie. Not Windows. Windows is pretty much unique in requiring a reboot for every single update.Fayd wrote:there's some program that allows linux users to install and use updates without rebooting the OS. i forget its name, but it saves you the downtime of rebooting.Wibla wrote:450 days sounds like a very insecure centos system
I reboot my workstation whenever I need to (usually after an OS update).
no, not a package manager. i know what a package manager is.Monkeh16 wrote: It's called a package manager and a sane design. ie. Not Windows. Windows is pretty much unique in requiring a reboot for every single update.
this isnt released under GPL. it's paid-for.
it's used for servers so that they minimize their downtime.
here we are.. http://www.ksplice.com/
Maybe so, but when a kernel update comes through on my Ubuntu system every few weeks, I'd rather spend 5 minutes mindlessly rebooting it, rather than 30 minutes poring through kernel changelogs to determine if I need to spend 5 minutes rebooting.Monkeh16 wrote:Aware of a remotely exploitable kernel bug? Because that's the only thing you need to reboot for.Wibla wrote:450 days sounds like a very insecure centos system
I reboot my workstation whenever I need to (usually after an OS update).
There are security announcements y'know.Metaluna wrote:Maybe so, but when a kernel update comes through on my Ubuntu system every few weeks, I'd rather spend 5 minutes mindlessly rebooting it, rather than 30 minutes poring through kernel changelogs to determine if I need to spend 5 minutes rebooting.Monkeh16 wrote:Aware of a remotely exploitable kernel bug? Because that's the only thing you need to reboot for.Wibla wrote:450 days sounds like a very insecure centos system
I reboot my workstation whenever I need to (usually after an OS update).
I wouldn't trust that as far as I could throw it. Especially as they seem to think Dreamhost are experts. A properly configured server will reboot in a matter of minutes, for free. Less probably, as you don't have to reboot the hardware any more.Fayd wrote:no, not a package manager. i know what a package manager is.Monkeh16 wrote: It's called a package manager and a sane design. ie. Not Windows. Windows is pretty much unique in requiring a reboot for every single update.
this isnt released under GPL. it's paid-for.
it's used for servers so that they minimize their downtime.
here we are.. http://www.ksplice.com/
-
- *Lifetime Patron*
- Posts: 2000
- Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:39 am
- Location: Finland
Ok, more or less every update. Meanwhile I don't have to reboot more than once every four or five months.danimal wrote:that is not correct, windows does not require a reboot for every update.Monkeh16 wrote:It's called a package manager and a sane design. ie. Not Windows. Windows is pretty much unique in requiring a reboot for every single update.
Required reboots are not really a problem anymore, on Linux or on Windows. And who gives a shit anyway? This is a non-issue if you ask me.
I usually let my workstation (Win7) go to sleep on its own after a while, but sometimes even the modest 3W bothers me so I turn it of completely quite often. I seldom reboot just to reboot. My server (Linux) never sleeps and after a kernel upgrade I usually reboot it.
I usually let my workstation (Win7) go to sleep on its own after a while, but sometimes even the modest 3W bothers me so I turn it of completely quite often. I seldom reboot just to reboot. My server (Linux) never sleeps and after a kernel upgrade I usually reboot it.
They're a problem for me for a number of reasons. One is I lose my sample rate without the SPDIF source, which means no audio at all while one box is down. Another is that it's unnecessary wear on mechanical parts (fans, HDDs, etc).Vicotnik wrote:Required reboots are not really a problem anymore, on Linux or on Windows. And who gives a shit anyway? This is a non-issue if you ask me.
Well it's not an upgrade without a reboot.My server (Linux) never sleeps and after a kernel upgrade I usually reboot it.
i apologize in advance for sounding like i'm ragging on you but that is a pointless goal... there is absolutely nothing wrong with rebooting a server.Monkeh16 wrote: Ok, more or less every update. Meanwhile I don't have to reboot more than once every four or five months.
rebooting a server doesn't mean that you have to shut the power off, but...Monkeh16 wrote:Another is that it's unnecessary wear on mechanical parts (fans, HDDs, etc).
how many times have i argued this with the engineers that i used to support... if the voltage spike on cold startup was an issue, how come the manufacturer(s) never have a specification for power cycling?
if it was a significant failure mode, there would be a limitation on it.
I have never seen an incandescent light bulb (or even florescent) burn out while it was on (although it can happen), but have frequently seen lights burn out when first turned on. So there definitely is some issue with turn-on spikes in electrical equipment.danimal wrote:rebooting a server doesn't mean that you have to shut the power off, but...
how many times have i argued this with the engineers that i used to support... if the voltage spike on cold startup was an issue, how come the manufacturer(s) never have a specification for power cycling?
if it was a significant failure mode, there would be a limitation on it.
But I am not sure if it applies to DC to the same degree as to AC. Also don't know if having a UPS and good PS can effectively prevent turn-on spike problems. However, even if it can happen (turn-on spikes damaging equipment), doesn't mean that it is anything to worry about in most circumstances for most parts. I do think that disk drives are an exception and there is some concern for them, which is why disk drives are rated for number of turn on cycles.
It's not a goal, it's a reality. I do not need to reboot, because there are no updates which require it.danimal wrote:i apologize in advance for sounding like i'm ragging on you but that is a pointless goal... there is absolutely nothing wrong with rebooting a server.Monkeh16 wrote: Ok, more or less every update. Meanwhile I don't have to reboot more than once every four or five months.
then you shouldn't have any problem showing us that rating, for the WD2001FASS that i just bought today.m0002a wrote: which is why disk drives are rated for number of turn on cycles.
Last edited by danimal on Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In checking the WD website, it appears they no longer publish on-off cycle ratings (at least that I can tell on their website). They do publish rated number of load/unload cycles (300,000), which is somewhat related to on-off cycles (both of which are tracked by S.M.A.R.T. the Self-Monitoring, Analysis, and Reporting Technology).danimal wrote:then you shouldn't have any problem showing us that rating, for the WD2001FASS that i just bought today.
Seagate also rates many of its consumer drives for 300,000 load/unload cycles, and rates them for 100,000 on-off cycles (but the on-off cycle rating depends on humidity and temperature).
As to why WD no longer rates their drives for on-off cycles (even though Seagate does), I don't know, but probably because it not a "practical" limitation. If a drive is rated for 100,000 on-off cycles (as Seagate does), then that would be 27 reboots every single day for 10 years, something that is extremely unlikely to happen. Also, the 300,000 rating for load/unload cycles is likely to be reached before a 100,000 on-off cycle limit is reached (since a reboot includes two load/unload cycles).
Although I stated my opinion in a previous post that rebooting a modern computer should not be a concern, it would be absurd to suppose that one can reboot a computer an infinite number of times without some adverse affect to a hard drive (even if the drive did not completely fail).
you still don't get it, so lets try another approach.m0002a wrote: As to why WD no longer rates their drives for on-off cycles (even though Seagate does
here is the seagate warranty: http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?l ... 04090aRCRD
do you see anything about power cycling in there? of course not.
a drive can be set to spin down during sleep mode, in order to save power, so the heads will park at that point, it's not just when the power is turned off.
I said that drives are rated for start-stop cycles. It turns out that WD no longer publishes that spec, but Seagate does. I also mentioned that the load/unload spec that WD publishes will likely occur first, so that may be why they don't publish a start-stop cycle spec (and also because it would be extremely difficult to actually test it).danimal wrote:you still don't get it, so lets try another approach.m0002a wrote: As to why WD no longer rates their drives for on-off cycles (even though Seagate does
here is the seagate warranty: http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?l ... 04090aRCRD
do you see anything about power cycling in there? of course not.
a drive can be set to spin down during sleep mode, in order to save power, so the heads will park at that point, it's not just when the power is turned off.
I don't understand what the warranty has to do with this discussion (you will have to explain that to me).
I said previously that start-stop cycles is not a practical limitation, since no one can turn off and turn on (cold boot) their computer 100,000 times (the Seagate rating for their consumer drives). But the Seagate drives are nonetheless rated for start-stop cycles.