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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-performance by date

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