Re:Intel Unleashes Its First 8-Core Desktop Processor
by nullc on Friday August 29, 2014 @09:26PM
(#8245260)
Considering the haswell parts don't support ECC, how many random bitflips per hour are your 128GB of DDR ram going to be taking and how many instances of unrecoverable data loss per year does that translate into on average?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Intel Unleashes Its First 8-Core Desktop Processor
by sp332 on Saturday August 30, 2014 @01:04AM
(#8245711)
That's it, I'm running my RAM in a ZFS pool from now on! Now I just need 128GB of RAM to run ZFS... /s
Re:Intel Unleashes Its First 8-Core Desktop Processor
by drewg123 on Saturday August 30, 2014 @12:42PM
(#8246861)
You joke, but running ZFS on disk w/o ECC RAM is not a good idea. See https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/zfs-macos/qguq6LCf1Q...
Re:Intel Unleashes Its First 8-Core Desktop Processor
by sp332 on Saturday August 30, 2014 @02:32PM
(#8247165)
I've heard this from several sources, but is it worse than any other FS? I mean it seems obvious that data corrupted in RAM will be corrupted when you write it to disk. I think people are worried about software RAID vs hardware RAID, since all hardware RAID platforms have ECC cache and software RAID should too.
Re:Intel Unleashes Its First 8-Core Desktop Processor
by j00lz on Sunday August 31, 2014 @04:10AM
(#8248751)
It is worse as ram corruption can cause a loss of the entire zfs pool. there are no zfs recovery tools available, so data recovery can be next to impossible or very expensive.