Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: When Sleeping, MacPro Turns Itself Off

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    310

    Default Apple Hardware Test reports trouble with new hard drive (?!)

    Apple Hardware Test found this error:

    4HDD/11/40000000: SATA(2,0)

    If that means "SATA Bus 0, Bay 2," then the problem is with the new hard disk hosting the boot volume, or perhaps with the bay itself? Because the computer turned off upon sleeping before this new disk and the clean OS were installed, the computer may have two problems: whatever may be wrong with this disk, and whatever is causing the shut-downs.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Grangeville, ID USA
    Posts
    9,119

    Default

    Why are you still sleeping your computer?


    Switch the hard drive to a different bay, see if the problem moves or goes away.


    Rick
    molṑn labe'
    "I am a mortal enemy to arbitrary government and unlimited power. I am naturally very jealous for the rights and liberties of my country, and the least encroachment of those invaluable privileges is apt to make my blood boil."
--Ben Franklin

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    310

    Default Bay 2 May Be Bad

    The two new hard drives were in Bays 1 and 2. Switching them yields the same error in Apple Hardware Test, so it appears that the trouble is with the bay itself, not the hard drives. From what (questionable Web pages) I have read, Apple Hardware Test does not actually test the hard drives, but only connectivity to them, so there may be a problem with the connector in Bay 2. Is the bay at risk for garbling data?

    4HDD/11/40000000: SATA(2,0)

    I let the computer sleep only to save electricity and lower the electric bill. I use it in short bursts, so it's nice to have it ready when I need it, and costing little when I don't.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,784

    Default

    Problem is....

    If you having an actual sleep issue, you may risk corrupting data to save a buck a month on power. Sleep is a very complex thing, with caching, power management, sensors, firmware code, sleep image held in RAM, and so on. If one of those things is not happy or functioning correctly—every time—you will not have safe, effective sleep/wake cycles.

    So, in a nutshell, you have 3 options:

    • Hope to somehow solve the underlying problem with bay 2, and use sleep safely again
    • Shut down and start up more often
    • Sleep monitor only, let the hard drives spin



    Sleep seems to work better on newer hardware, likely due to power management, firmware, and OS advances. It was not that rare, 8+ years ago to find that sleep was less than perfect. Which is why the old-timers have scar tissue from sleep issues, and still don't trust it or recommend it.

    I wonder if you could eject the disk (unmount) in bay 2 before sleep, and reduce your risk of the possibility of data corruption. Dunno....
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise
    Posts
    988

    Default

    Oh I just have to jump in here. That Mac Pro at idle uses 146 watts or about $80 worth of electricity a year. Turning off and on a computer is where the most wear comes from, not counting if it's over heated. How much does turning it off and on degrade the computers life time use? The most efficient use of electricity is in the electric motor that runs the hard drive. Sleeping the hard drive can't save that much electricity, better to turn it off and on. But the wait time is killer at each start up. Installing a SSD in one of the bays as the startup drive would speed that up considerably, but that costs your savings.

    Basically I think it's all a push when you consider the finical outlay. Leaving it running 24/7 costs (at above rates) 22 cents a day. Is the time waiting for the start up worth 22 cents? If you don't use your computer every day, turn it off.

    I'd be most concerned about that snapping sound.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    310

    Default Macbeth hath murthered sleep! Macbeth shall sleep no more!

    What about that error code from Apple Hardware Test? Anyone know whether I should worry? Cheapest fix would be to leave that bay empty, if it is unreliable; but, I'd rather keep using it, if the code is benign.

    Regarding the economics of sleep, it sounds as though the best course is to stop sleeping. It's a great computer when it's running, and now I understand why Rick asked why I was still sleeping it!

    I used to see something similar all the time back when I tried selling cars. A buyer would walk in to the dealership saying, "I have to trade, because I can't afford the gas for my car." Truth was, the cost of rolling the unpaid balance of the purchase price of the old car into the new car's loan far outweighed the savings in fuel. I own this Mac free and clear. For the price of the electricity to run it, it is, to me, as good as any newer model! Seriously. If you are not crushing huge media files or folding proteins, an eight-year-old Mac can more than keep up with any everyday task.

    Now, a new problem is surfacing. The Finder is often unresponsive in this clean install of El Capitan, and can not be restarted without rebooting the computer. Is this a known issue with El Capitan, something a future update may fix? How might I fix it?

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    310

    Default Apple Knows about the Unresponsive Finder

    A Genius at the Apple Store said that Apple routinely allows new version of Mac OS X to be installed on older computers, knowing they are buggy on older hardware, and then is slow to introduce fixes. El Capitan's Finder is currently unreliable on legions of older Macs, but will probably run well after many more months or a year. Until then, he advised me to back off to an older OS. Mavericks runs fine.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Grangeville, ID USA
    Posts
    9,119

    Default

    Part of the reason I don't give much feedback vis a vis ElCap is we are still sitting at 10.10 for all our computers. I have a couple test machines that have ElCap boot volumes, but not one workstation can easily run ElCap without compromising some of the networking capabilities. Unless I run full time in an operating system it is nearly impossible to get a feel for how it works and where the bugs are. Test machine time doesn't count since it usually is targeted towards hardware needing fixes or certification. Too narrow a usage to gain any real knowledge of the operating system itself.

    Rick
    molṑn labe'
    "I am a mortal enemy to arbitrary government and unlimited power. I am naturally very jealous for the rights and liberties of my country, and the least encroachment of those invaluable privileges is apt to make my blood boil."
--Ben Franklin

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,784

    Default

    Huh. Have not seen issues with Finder. Running 10.11 on machines as far back as 2009 iMacs.

    10.11.4 just popped. Worth updating to see if there is any change?
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •