[CentOS] server specifications

Mon Feb 14 05:16:43 UTC 2011
Rob Kampen <rkampen at kampensonline.com>

Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 10:23 PM, David Brian Chait <dchait at invenda.com> wrote:
>> By doubling the hardware, you still do not overcome the potential corruption that could occur with non-ecc memory. If this is truly a mission critical application then it really does not serve much of a purpose to short change yourself with substandard hardware.
> First, please don't top post in this group.
> Second, you've got a historically valid point about ECC's advantages.
> But the accumulated costs of the higher end motherboard, memory,
> shortage of space for upgrades in the same unit, the downtime at the
> BIOS to reset the "disabled by default" ECC settings in the BIOS, and
> the system monitoring to detect and manage such errors add up *really
> fast* in a moderate sized shop.
> Worse, I've seen some serious false economies with memory. People with
> tight budgets getting third party memory to install themselves, then
> losing all their "savings" in downtime because they had trouble
> telling the difference between "hard enough to seat the RAM" and "hard
> enough to crack the motherboard, cut your hand, and bleed all over
> important junctions".
> Pleae, name a single instance in the last 10 years where ECC
> demonstrably saved you work, especially if you made sure ti burn in
> the ssytem components on servers upon their first bootup...
Twice in the last two years my intel server mb with ECC RAM showed 
errors (after moving system physically) and thus I did a reseat (after 
cleaning) of the modules and all is now well. No data lost, complete 
confidence - definitely gets my vote for servers!!
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rkampen.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 313 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110214/a026a2c1/attachment-0005.vcf>