ECC Vs Non-ECC Memory

Discussion in 'IBM' started by Will, Apr 7, 2006.

  1. Will

    Will Guest

    If you are using Windows 2003, what would be the perceived difference in
    behavior between ECC and Non-ECC memory in the case that some memory goes
    bad? In the case of Non-ECC, I guess you just get corruption in the OS or
    data areas, and potentially a blue-screen. What happens with ECC? Is
    there any way for the memory fault to be trapped elegantly by the OS and
    reported back without stopping the OS? Or is the issue more that ECC
    memory behaves more like a RAID system and can compensate for failures in
    any one bit? But once two bits in the same location go bad, you get the
    same effect?
     
    Will, Apr 7, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Will

    daytripper Guest

    An error corrected by ECC (pretty much through the entire memory hierarchy) is
    usually quiet event. And unless some widget is harvesting error logs, nobody
    will ever know when correctable errors are occurring.

    Otoh, an error that exceeds the correction capability of the hardware may
    prove to be a fatal event at some level (application or system-wide) if a
    retry or "replay" doesn't provide coherent data. An OS may be designed to
    simply croak the application that encountered the error (assuming the error
    didn't occur in a system critical context) otherwise it's reboot city.

    So you're pretty much right...

    /daytripper
     
    daytripper, Apr 7, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.