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.

Reply via email to