*BSD News Article 55986


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sesqui.net!uuneo.neosoft.com!nmtigw!zuul.nmti.com!peter
From: peter@nmti.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Parity SIMMS really necessary?
Date: 4 Dec 1995 00:35:14 GMT
Organization: Network/development platform support, NMTI
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <49tfo2$ht2@zuul.nmti.com>
References: <49lbnr$4fq@interport.net> <49qabp$efi@zuul.nmti.com> <49spbi$1m8@sixpack.wustl.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sonic.nmti.com

In article <49spbi$1m8@sixpack.wustl.edu>,
Matt Lundberg <ml@sixpack.wustl.edu> wrote:
> As for using non-parity SIMMS, what does that extra bit give you
> anyway?  I agree that ECC is an advantage, but parity will only 
> inform you that you have a memory error, in most cases by locking
> up the machine.  This is no help.

I'd much rather be informed that I have a memory error than have random
bits of my data scrambled.
-- 
Peter da Silva    (NIC: PJD2)      `-_-'             1601 Industrial Boulevard
Bailey Network Management           'U`             Sugar Land, TX  77487-5013
+1 713 274 5180         "Har du kramat din varg idag?"                     USA
Bailey pays for my technical expertise.        My opinions probably scare them