On 18.01.2014 00:18, Duncan wrote: > valleysmail-lol5@xxxxxxxx posted on Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:33:35 +0000 as > excerpted: > >> I'd like to know if there are drawbacks in using btrfs with non-ECC RAM >> instead of using ext4 with non-ECC RAM. I know that some features of >> btrfs may rely on ECC RAM > > Crossed signals somewhere, as that's entirely incorrect. Btrfs does have > date integrity checksumming as one of its features -- one which I'm using > here BTW with raid1 mode so there's two copies of everything, on > different devices, in case one goes bad -- but BTRFS IN NO WAY REQUIRES > ECC RAM. ECC RAM is a hardware solution to a conceptually similar data > integrity problem in memory to the problem btrfs addresses as filesystem > software for non-volatile storage, but the two shouldn't be confused for > each other or conflated at all -- they're entirely separate in practice, > and one is hardware while the other is software. To be fair: Both problems are essentially hardware problems where data gets corrupted, but the solutions are different. ECC is only used in systems where the additional cost for the hardware, energy (registered ECC-RAM uses more electricity than register-less non-ECC-RAM), and space (ECC-RAM is physically larger) is less than the cost of recovery in case of soft errors caused by non-ECC-RAM. ECC-RAM does not offer a memory performance advantage. See Wikipedia for more info about registered RAM and ECC-RAM. Raid1 uses more power and space as well, but also adds read performance. So _there are reasons to use Raid1 besides resilience_. > […]
begin:vcard fn:Justus Seifert n:Seifert;Justus adr:;;;Dresden;Saxony;;Germany email;internet:justus.seifert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx tel;cell:+4915730640509 x-mozilla-html:FALSE version:2.1 end:vcard
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
