Article View: comp.sys.misc
Article #1873Re: comp.sys.next, etc.
From: Haller
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 1988 14:48
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 1988 14:48
18 lines
1329 bytes
1329 bytes
In article <575@micropen>, dave@micropen (David F. Carlson) writes: > > Is there any good answer for omitting parity checks on memory? > The MTBF for a machine without parity is larger than a machine with parity. This is because the additional parts all have non-zero failure rates, but parity adds nothing to the reliability of the system, unlike EDC, which allows one to continue using the computer even in the face of a single memory problem. Parity circuitry, in the simplist design, also slows down access to memory. So what do you gain with parity - a more timely notification that there is something incorrect in the memory. This allows an increase in reliance on the results produced by the computer, but doesn't increase the reliability by anything. John Haller att!ihlpl!jhh or jhh@ihlpl.att.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<7471@ihlpl.ATT.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!nrl-cmf!cmcl2!rutgers!att!ihlpl!jhhReferences:
<5178@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <40975@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> <575@micropen>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!nrl-cmf!cmcl2!rutgers!att!ihlpl!jhh From: jhh@ihlpl.ATT.COM (Haller) Newsgroups: comp.sys.misc,news.groups Subject: Re: comp.sys.next, etc. Summary: Omitting parity makes machine more reliable Message-ID: <7471@ihlpl.ATT.COM> Date: 2 Nov 88 14:48:27 GMT References: <5178@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <40975@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> <575@micropen> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, Illinois Lines: 17