Tony Travis wrote: > Memtest86+ is fine for 'burn-in' tests, but it does not do a realistic > memory stress test under the conditions that normal applications run.
Wow, deja vu. I just remembered we had almost exactly this same discussion 2 years ago, in fact I apparently sent you my hacked up version of memtester which has delays in it between the write and read cycles, to allow it to catch bit fade (due to radiation or whatever). One thing I still don't get though, if memtester is catching memory errors which only appear when _other parts of the system are active_ does replacing the "bad" memory actually cure these problems? That is, if memtest86+ runs cleanly and memtester finds problems, is it really the memory which is the issue? Regards, David Mathog [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Sequence Analysis Facility, Biology Division, Caltech _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, [email protected] To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
