Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:37:18 +0200 From: "M.Hirsch" <M.Hirsch@gmx.de> To: Wilko Bulte <wb@freebie.xs4all.nl> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6.x CVSUP today crashes with zero load ... Message-ID: <44A0538E.6090906@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <20060626212654.GB93703@freebie.xs4all.nl> References: <E1FuYsL-000HT3-H2@dilbert.firstcallgroup.co.uk> <20060626100949.G24406@fledge.watson.org> <20060626081029.L1114@ganymede.hub.org> <20060626140333.M38418@fledge.watson.org> <20060626235355.Q95667@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <44A04FD2.1030001@hirsch.it> <20060626212654.GB93703@freebie.xs4all.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nope, I'd like my bank data to be stored on a system that does ECC, no question. But please, on hard disk level (RAID; that is _permanent_), not in the RAM of a single node. If memory gets corrupted, please, raise a kernel panic... Even if there's ECC in place. Counter question: Would you like your bank account data to be stored on a medium where one failure can be corrected, two can be detected, but three go unnoticed? How unlikely is that, if you've got some hardware that is really /broken/? I know this is a rather random thing to happen. Still, I think ECC memory is overrated. Better have it fail immediately. _With a kernel panic, please_ M. Wilko Bulte schrieb: >Balderdash. > >Following your rationale you want your bank account data >silently be corrupted by hardware with bit errors? Be my guest, give >me ECC any day. > >Proper hardware will log the ECC errors, a proper OS tailored to that >hardware will log and notify the sysadmins. > >That is how it should be done. > >Wilko > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44A0538E.6090906>