I agree with Joel. PC based platforms in my experience has been very hardware error prone, maybe due to the components. Like Joel, I haven't seen a hardware failure in the Z/OS world since the 70s.
Scott ford www.identityforge.com from my IPAD > On Jan 7, 2014, at 9:59 AM, David Crayford <dcrayf...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 07/01/2014, at 6:57 AM, "Joel C. Ewing" <jcew...@acm.org> wrote: >> >> The first step to successful diagnosing and repair of a software failure >> is to be certain it IS a software issue and not some random hardware >> glitch. This is made more difficult in the Intel world by the very >> thing that makes these platforms affordable - a multitude of >> manufacturers of motherboards, memory, hardware interface cards and >> peripherals all applying their own concept of "acceptable" engineering >> design while trying to make fast and cheap hardware. > > Is that still the case today? Even cheap x86 blades have machine check > architecture which can signal software on hardware failures. It must be over > a decade or so since IBM started stuffing mainframe quality RAM modules into > x86 servers, chipkill etc. 90% of server failures were due to RAM errors. You > don't have to search too far to find 99.999 platforms running Intel. You'll > pay for it though. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
