Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:08:01 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Tuc at T-B-O-H <ml@t-b-o-h.net>
To:        xfb52@dial.pipex.com (Alex Zbyslaw)
Cc:        Tuc at T-B-O-H <ml@t-b-o-h.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Problems since 5.3-RELEASE-p15
Message-ID:  <200507072108.j67L81Vs018338@himinbjorg.tucs-beachin-obx-house.com>
In-Reply-To: <42B84964.6070909@dial.pipex.com> from "Alex Zbyslaw" at Jun 21, 2005 06:07:48 PM

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >>If the problem is intermittent then I would  suspect the hardware (I 
> >>know, everyone always says that, but I really have used a brand new 
> >>server which segfaulted randomly and it really was a memory problem).  
> >>Try building a memtest86 CD from the ports (from a different machine 
> >>perhaps) and running it for at least several hours, though it might not 
> >>take that long.  Your BIOS might also support extended memory tests (try 
> >>disabling quick POST) though they are supposed to be less effective than 
> >>memtest86.
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >	Ok, will try that. I run SETI so I think I'm constantly stressing 
> >the machine. But I'll give it a try.
> >
> *If* there are intermittent memory errors, then it could be that SETI 
> always happens to get them in the data it is dealing with, in which case 
> it might run perfectly happily but just produce the wrong results.  
> Memtest is dull, and stops you using your PC, but like Windows virus 
> scans, it seems like a necessary evil in this case.
> 
	I did the standard tests for 24 hours (21 passes) and it didn't fail.
I ran the 90 minute fading one for 24 hours (8 runs) and it too didn't fail.

		Tuc



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200507072108.j67L81Vs018338>