From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
To: Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: ECC RAM really needed?
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 21:15:53 -0500
Message-ID: <20070526021553.GA8875@wolff.to> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4657912B.3000508@emolecules.com>
References: <4657912B.3000508@emolecules.com>
On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 18:45:15 -0700,
Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com> wrote:
> We're thinking of building some new servers. We bought some a while back
> that have ECC (error correcting) RAM, which is absurdly expensive compared
> to the same amount of non-ECC RAM. Does anyone have any real-life data
> about the error rate of non-ECC RAM, and whether it matters or not? In my
> long career, I've never once had a computer that corrupted memory, or at
> least I never knew if it did. ECC sound like a good idea, but is it
> solving a non-problem?
In the past when I purchased ECC ram it wasn't that much more expensive
than nonECC ram.
Wikipedia suggests a rule of thumb of one error per month per gigabyte,
though suggests error rates vary widely. They reference a paper that should
provide you with more background.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: bruno@wolff.to, craig_james@emolecules.com
Subject: Re: ECC RAM really needed?
In-Reply-To: <20070526021553.GA8875@wolff.to>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox