Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: ECC RAM really needed?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ECC RAM really needed?
Date: 2007-05-26 04:19:27
Message-ID: 29812.1180153167@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> writes:
> The paper I would recommend is
> http://www.tezzaron.com/about/papers/soft_errors_1_1_secure.pdf
> which is a summary of many other people's papers, and quite informative. 
> I know I had no idea before reading it how much error rates go up with 
> increasing altitute.

Not real surprising if you figure the problem is mostly cosmic rays.

Anyway, this paper says

> Even using a relatively conservative error rate (500 FIT/Mbit), a
> system with 1 GByte of RAM can expect an error every two weeks;

which should pretty much cure any idea that you want to run a server
with non-ECC memory.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Peter T. BreuerDate: 2007-05-26 07:07:26
Subject: Re: general PG network slowness (possible cure) (repost)
Previous:From: Greg SmithDate: 2007-05-26 04:01:56
Subject: Re: ECC RAM really needed?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group