[vox-tech] ECC memory --- is it worth it? (semi-OT)

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Bill Broadley (bill at cse.ucdavis.edu):
> Rick Moen wrote:
> > A bad bit in memory, if indicative of a physical defect, will quickly
> > manifest unmistakeably on Linux in the manner I described.  If not thus
> > indicative, (from empirical observation over a long period of time:)
> > it's extremely unlikely to have detectable long-term consequences.  
> 
> You speculate that it contributes to premature httpd deaths but is
> undetectable long term?

I didn't think what I was saying was that difficult to follow, but here
is what I said, again:  "I'd speculate that some non-zero percentage of
prematurely deceased httpd instances owed to that...."  I figure that
possibly (i.e., speculate that) some quite small number of such events
ultimately owe to uncorrected single-bit memory errors that are not
associated with actually bad RAM -- but, effectively, it's way down in
the noise of undiagnosable oddities.  

> $10 a dimm requires you to "pay through the node" and the "wealth of
> midas"?  

If you assumed I was endorsing your figure, you assumed wrong.  ;->

Ironically, the most recent RAM I purchased _was_ ECC, because it was
a gig for the Intel L440GX+ "Lancewood" motherboard in my old VA Linux
Systems model 2230 server.  However, let's talk about the HP ProLiant
380 I was working on recently:  128 MB ECC Registered is $42 at SA
Technologies, Inc. (where I would buy such things by preference).
Without ECC, $32.  ECC thus exacts a 31% premium in that case.  

Now, would I pay that premium?  I might, or I might put the money
somewhere else, where it's more likely to yield significant benefit.
(In 2007, I'd actually try not to drop cash on a 800MHz PIII that I
didn't dearly love, but five years ago might have been different.)

Anyhow, I see that you go on in the same vein at rather great length,
and I hope that my point was actually abundantly clear to most people,
which will have to suffice.  So, I bid you adieu at this point.