Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 07:12:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Feenberg <feenberg@nber.org> To: Jon Radel <jon@radel.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: upgrade to 10.3R .... Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1609290659260.3056@nber7.nber.org> In-Reply-To: <7adc6f3c-3167-6df9-26e8-a69e22bb49b3@radel.com> References: <3d09a931-73f8-65d0-588a-70a57c812e85@hiwaay.net> <44mvirztvd.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <7adc6f3c-3167-6df9-26e8-a69e22bb49b3@radel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Jon Radel wrote: > On 9/28/16 3:50 PM, Lowell Gilbert wrote: >> "William A. Mahaffey III" <wam@hiwaay.net> writes: >> >>> are many online URLs with dire warnings about using ZFS & non-ECC RAM >>> causing data corruption (this box is a commodity desktop w/ non-ECC >> >>> 1. Are these concerns valid, i.e. founded in fact ? >> Possibly not. They posting seems rather convincing that special concerns about zfs and ECC memory should be considered as "overwrought": http://jrs-s.net/2015/02/03/will-zfs-and-non-ecc-ram-kill-your-data/ dan feenberg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LRH.2.20.1609290659260.3056>