So to summarize that article, "using ECC memory is safer than not using ECC memory." I don't think this was ever in doubt. Note that he does *not* talk about anything like the hypothetical "a scrub will corrupt all your data" scenario (nor is anything like that mentioned in his popular "ZFS: Read Me 1st" article); in fact, the only really ZFS-specific point that he raises at all is the part about dirty data likely being in memory (= vulnerable to bit flips) for longer than it would be in other file systems.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Philip Robar <philip.ro...@gmail.com>wrote: > > From Andrew Galloway of Nexenta (Whom I'm pretty sure most would accept as > the definition of a ZFS expert.*) > > ECC vs non-ECC RAM: The Great Debate: > > http://nex7.blogspot.com/2014/03/ecc-vs-non-ecc-ram-great-debate.html > > > * "...I've been on literally 1000's of large ZFS deployments in the last > 2+ years, often called in when they were broken, and much of what I say is > backed up by quite a bit of experience. This article is also often used, > cited, reviewed, and so on by many of my fellow ZFS support personnel, so > it gets around and mistakes in it get back to me eventually. I can be wrong > - but especially if you're new to ZFS, you're going to be better served not > assuming I am. :)" > > > Phil > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "zfs-macos" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to zfs-macos+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "zfs-macos" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to zfs-macos+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.