Re: ECC RAM really needed?

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ECC RAM really needed?
Date: 2007-05-27 14:27:08
Message-ID: 20070527142708.GB5979@phlogiston.dyndns.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 10:52:14AM -0400, mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc wrote:
> Do you want to be the one person who does notice a problem? :-)

Right, and notice that when you notice the problem _may not_ be when
it happens. The problem with errors in memory (or on disk
controllers, another place not to skimp in your hardware budget for
database machines) is that the unnoticed failure could well write
corrupted data out. It's some time later that you notice you have
the problem, when you go to look at the data and discover you have
garbage.

If your data is worth storing, it's worth storing correctly, and so
doing things to improve the chances of correct storage is a good
idea.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
Everything that happens in the world happens at some place.
--Jane Jacobs

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2007-05-27 15:53:38 Re: Feature suggestion : FAST CLUSTER
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-05-26 16:46:11 Re: general PG network slowness (possible cure) (repost)