The price of Reg ECC is not significantly higher than regular ram at
this point. Plus if you go with super fast 2-2-2-6 then it's actualy
more than good ol 2.5 Reg ECC.
On 7/26/05, PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com> wrote:
> > I'm a little leary as it is definitely a version 1.0 product (it is
> > still using an FPGA as the controller, so they were obviously pushing to
> > get the card into production).
> Not necessarily. FPGA's have become a sensible choice now. My RME studio
> soundcard uses a big FPGA.
> The performance in the test doesn't look that good, though, but don't
> forget it was run under windows. For instance they get 77s to copy the
> Firefox source tree on their Athlon 64/raptor ; my Duron / 7200rpm ide
> drive does it in 30 seconds, but not with windows of course.
> However it doesnt' use ECC so... That's a pity, because they could have
> implemented ECC in "software" inside the chip, and have the benefits of
> error correction with normal, cheap RAM.
> Well; wait and see...
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Alex Turner||Date: 2005-07-26 19:11:42|
|Subject: Re: Cheap RAM disk?|
|Previous:||From: Sven Willenberger||Date: 2005-07-26 19:03:17|
|Subject: Re: faster INSERT with possible pre-existing row?|