Hello!
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, M.Hirsch wrote:
ECC is a way to mask broken hardware. I rather have my hardware fail directly
when it does first, so I can replace it _immediately_
You got it backwards. If your data has any value to you, then you don't want
to miss any single-error bit in it, do you? If you're running hardware w/o
ECC, your single-bit error in your data will go to the disk unnoticed, and
you'll lose your data. With ECC, hardware will correct it. In (rare) case of
multiple-bit error ECC logic will generate NMI for you, so you'll notice and
"replace it _immediately_" instead of two weeks ago when your archive wont
extract.
What's your hardware good for if it passes a "test", but fails in production?
It's the way in what RAM will manifest single-bit errors: you run memory test
- it won't catch them, later in production you'll miss this error because
nothing will provide extra sanity check of your data.
ECC is totally overrated.
Only by the people who don't understand it's point!
Sincerely, Dmitry
--
Atlantis ISP, System Administrator
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
