Just a note to mention that the board must support ECC memory or it will do
little good to install it. Generally only workstation/server class boards
offer such support. Most desktop boards do not.
Chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https:
Daniel O'Connor, on 6/27/2007 9:14 AM, said the following:
On Wednesday 27 June 2007 21:58, Charles Marcus wrote:
> While slower, it has benefits for something like a database
> server. For a home machine, the added expense and slower speed are
> not worth it. Not exactly a definitive answer
On Wednesday 27 June 2007 21:58, Charles Marcus wrote:
> > While slower, it has benefits for something like a database
> > server. For a home machine, the added expense and slower speed are
> > not worth it. Not exactly a definitive answer as there is gray
> > area but for a production server,
Well, this contradicts what John just said, which is why I asked for an
AUTHORITATIVE source.
John? Anyone? White paper? Unbiased tests/comparison?
I have seen performance penalties for ECC of 0% to 5% range.
Here is are some links:
http://h20271.www2.hp.com/SMB-AP/cache/301687-0-0-102-121.htm
I recall reading somewhere that ECC memory was considerably slower than
non-ECC, and its benefits was mostly sales hype - ie, its ECC was not
precisely reliable...
Anyone know of an authoritative answer to this question?
> While slower, it has benefits for something like a database server.
>
