Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:34:54 +0100
From:      Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk>
To:        Igor Mozolevsky <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk>
Cc:        Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Hackers freeBSD <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Dieter BSD <dieterbsd@gmail.com>, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ECC support
Message-ID:  <3678FC1E-DDC5-4FB2-B6E9-6FC90D0C988E@gid.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <CADWvR2gBDjKFRW-X6ECJaGG7tSvOgk0rTk38O1qQ0hUWjRBF_A@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAA3ZYrBXZn1WpHWYGJYWJDPsk7iDahCas8RhnHC4w%2Babf4w4hA@mail.gmail.com> <55F88A18.6090504@FreeBSD.org> <20150916035904.GE67105@kib.kiev.ua> <93871ADA-EDA3-481C-9959-1D371AB44479@gid.co.uk> <CADWvR2gBDjKFRW-X6ECJaGG7tSvOgk0rTk38O1qQ0hUWjRBF_A@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

> On 16 Sep 2015, at 11:48, Igor Mozolevsky <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk> =
wrote:
>=20
> On 16 September 2015 at 08:51, Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> wrote:
>=20
> <snip>
>=20
>> - You might think that as memory density increases (ie bit cell size
> shrinks), error rates would increase. Apparently this wasn=E2=80=99t =
so up to 2009
> at least, see:
>>=20
>> http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~bianca/papers/sigmetrics09.pdf
>=20
> subsection 5.1:
>=20
> "=E2=80=A6 Figure 6 indicates a trend towards worse error behavior
> for increased capacities, although this trend is not consis-
> tent. [etc]

That=E2=80=99s talking about DIMM capacity, not the capacity (density) =
of individual chips on which they say (at the end of the same =
subsection):

"The best we can conclude therefore is that any chip size effect is =
unlikely to dominate error rates given that the trends are not =
consistent across various other confounders such as age and =
manufacturer.=E2=80=9D

I=E2=80=99ll admit to talking that point up a bit but it is =
counterintuitive. Memory designers have always been scared of cosmic =
rays etc but the suspected effects simply have not been noticeable. Most =
likely as they shrink features ever smaller, other factors like material =
purity dominate.

> There are also other environmental factors which would be more =
apparent in
> "lone-server" configuration vs well maintained and insulated data =
centres
> with very good power conditioning ;-)

Indeed, and that=E2=80=99s a whole other PITA. We went to colo and never =
looked back, but low-power options for small servers are getting better.

> --=20
> Igor M.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-hardware-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

--
Bob Bishop
rb@gid.co.uk







Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3678FC1E-DDC5-4FB2-B6E9-6FC90D0C988E>