Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!vic.news.telstra.net!act.news.telstra.net!psgrain!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!brighton.openmarket.com!decwrl!nntp.crl.com!reason.cdrom.com!usenet From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@FreeBSD.org> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc,comp.os.os2.setup.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: HELP: Can I mix memory speeds Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 16:59:35 -0700 Organization: Walnut Creek CDROM Lines: 42 Message-ID: <31F2C467.167EB0E7@FreeBSD.org> References: <31E07EA8.66E140D7@henge.com> <31E6880E.408D@nome.net> <4s7rae$m3a@symiserver2.symantec.com> <stephenkDutwB2.52D@netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: time.cdrom.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5a (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT i386) To: Stephen Knilans <stephenk@netcom.com> Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.hardware:45170 comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc:162092 comp.os.os2.setup.misc:17512 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:24181 Stephen Knilans wrote: > This is a REALLY stupid statement! The chance o a memory error is ALWAYS the > same, REGARDLESS of the O/S! Also, a crash in UNIX could be so I think your own ignorance is showing here, and if nothing else you owe Joerg an apology for referring to his argument as "stupid" when you, in fact, are busily making it plain that you haven't got the slightest idea of what this is all about. Nobody ever claimed that Parity memory would save the world, simply that it was a heck of a lot better to KNOW when your memory was going flakey than not to. With Partity memory, you can at least catch an NMI upon detection of the error and your UNIX (or any other) OS can then say "Hey, the state of my hardware isn't looking so hot anymore - I think it's time to sync the disks and PANIC!!" If I'm administering the system in question, you can bet that I'll then start swapping memory modules until those panics go away because the people I build systems for RELY on them to be stable, and undetected memory errors can only lead to pain and suffering of the most non-traceable kind. My time is worth more than that, to say nothing of the time of my customers > MANY people have had computers WITHOUT parity or tests, and have had NO > problems. I had several with BOTH, with NO problems! NOW, though my Many people drive without safety belts too and don't necessarily kill themselves. What does this prove? Do you advocate driving without belts too? God help us all if you're ever called upon to design an air traffic control system or a server who's reliability actually counts for something. Needless to say, I can only ask the Impressionable Youth on this newsgroup to ignore Stephan's advice entirely. While it's certainly true that your personal box may never suffer from memory problems, should you ever aspire to creating far more fault-tolerant systems, do NOT heed his advice! He hasn't a clue and owes us all an apology for so rudely rebutting the advice of someone who HAS. Parity/ECC is not just a sales trick, nor is it a panacea. What it is is merely one more valuable diagnostic aid for those trying to create the most reliable PC systems it's possible to make with today's technology. -- - Jordan Hubbard President, FreeBSD Project