John A Chaves wrote: > I didn't need to run a specific test for this. The normal workload of the > machine approximates a continuous selftest for almost the last year. > > Large files (4-12GB is typical) are being continuously packed and unpacked > with gzip and bzip2. Statistical analysis of the datasets is followed by > verification of the data, sometimes using diff, or md5sum, or python > scripts using numarray to mmap 2GB chunks at a time. The machine > often goes for days with a load level of 20+ and 32GB RAM + another 32GB > swap in use. It would be very unlikely for data corruption to go unnoticed. > > When I first got the machine I did have some problems with disks being > dropped from the RAID and occasional log messages implicating the IOMMU. > But that was with kernel 2.6.16.?, Kernels since 2.6.17 haven't had any > problem. > Ah thanks for that info,.. as far as I can tell,.. this "testing environment" should have found any corruptions I there had been any.
So I think we could take this as our first working system where the issue don't occur although we would expect it... Chris.
begin:vcard fn:Mitterer, Christoph Anton n:Mitterer;Christoph Anton email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] x-mozilla-html:TRUE version:2.1 end:vcard