On Apr 19, 2012, at 6:31 43PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
> On 4/18/12 8:09 PM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 18, 2012, at 5:55 32PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
>> > Dear Jeroen,
>> >
>> > In the work that led up to RFC3309, many of the errors found on the
>> > Internet pertained to single interface bit
On 4/18/12 8:09 PM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
On Apr 18, 2012, at 5:55 32PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
> Dear Jeroen,
>
> In the work that led up to RFC3309, many of the errors found on the
> Internet pertained to single interface bits, and not single data
> bits. Working at a large chip manufacturer th
On Apr 18, 2012, at 5:55 32PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
> On 4/18/12 12:35 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
>> Laurent GUERBY wrote:
>> > Do you have reference to recent papers with experimental data about
>> > non ECC memory errors? It should be fairly easy to do
>> Maybe this provides some information:
>>
On 4/18/12 12:35 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> Do you have reference to recent papers with experimental data about
> non ECC memory errors? It should be fairly easy to do
Maybe this provides some information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECC_memory#Problem_background
"W
Laurent GUERBY wrote:
Do you have reference to recent papers with experimental data about non
ECC memory errors? It should be fairly easy to do
Maybe this provides some information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECC_memory#Problem_background
"Work published between 2007 and 2009 showed widely
Jimmy Hess wrote:
Consider that the probability 16GB of SDRAM experiences at least one
single bit error at sea level,
in a given 6 hour period exceeds 66% = 1 - (1 - 1.3e-12 * 6)^(16 *
2^30 * 8).In any given 24 hour period, the probability of at least
one single bit error exceeds 98%.A
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:22:20AM -0700, Henk Hesselink wrote:
> > Have you looked at the HP ProLiant MicroServer?
>
> Notice it takes up to 8 GByte ECC memory and supports zfs
> via napp-it/Illumos. A hacked BIOS was required to use
> the 5th internal SATA port in AHCI mode, maybe that's
> no
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:22:20AM -0700, Henk Hesselink wrote:
> Have you looked at the HP ProLiant MicroServer?
Notice it takes up to 8 GByte ECC memory and supports zfs
via napp-it/Illumos. A hacked BIOS was required to use
the 5th internal SATA port in AHCI mode, maybe that's
no longer necessa
Have you looked at the HP ProLiant MicroServer?
Cheers,
Henk
On 13-04-12 12:06, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Leo Bicknell wrote:
But what's really missing is storage management. RAID5 (and similar)
require all drives to be online all the time. I'd love an intelligent
file system that could spin do
> Some quick looking at Newegg, 4GB DDR3 1333 ECC DIMM, $33.99. 4GB
> DDR3 1333 Non-ECC DIMM, $21.99. Savings, $12. (Yes, I realize the
> Motherboard also needs some extra circuitry, I expect it's less than $1
> in quantity though).
>
> Pretty much everyone I know values their data at more than
In a message written on Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 09:54:14PM -0400, Luke S. Crawford
wrote:
> On my current fleet (well under 100 servers) single bit errors are so rare
> that if I get one, I schedule that machine for removal from production.
In a previous life, in a previous time, I worked at a pla
> From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net]
> I'd have to say that that's been the experience here as well, ECC is
> great, yes, but it just doesn't seem to be something that is
> "absolutely
> vital" on an ongoing basis, as some of the other posters here have
> implied, to correct the constant
> In a past role, I did spend the time grepping through such a properly
> configured cluster, with tens of thousands of nodes, looking for failing
> hardware. I should have done a proper paper with statistics, but
> I did not. The vast majority of servers had zero correctable ecc errors,
> whi
> >> And silent memory corruption can make its way to the filesystem, or
> >> applications' internal saved data structures (such as the contents
> >> of a VM's registry database).
>
> > Since we don't hear about Mac mini server users screaming about how
> > their servers are constantly crashing
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 10:52:51AM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> Consider that the probability 16GB of SDRAM experiences at least one
> single bit error at sea level,
> in a given 6 hour period exceeds 66% = 1 - (1 - 1.3e-12 * 6)^(16 *
> 2^30 * 8).In any given 24 hour period, the probability of
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Mike wrote:
It's not like ECC memory requires a lot of power, a full-blown ATX
board or something; there is the Intel S1200KP Mini-ITX board.
See,
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.117.5936&rep=rep1&type=pdf
But the exact rate of single b
I think the simple test for this problem is to take a non-ECC machine, boot
from a CD/USB Key/etc with memtest or memtest86+ on it, and see if you get
errors over the course of a few days.
Getting errors will certainly prove that this problem exists (or that you
have bad ram).
On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 10:52 -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> In any given 24 hour period, the probability of at least
> one single bit error exceeds 98%.Assuming the memory is good and
> functioning correctly;
>
> It's expected to see on average approximately 3 to 4 1-bit errors
> per day. Mo
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
> Since we don't hear about Mac mini server users screaming about how
Do you hear of lots of Mac mini server users loading up 16GB of RAM?
> it's just a matter of time before your server's power supply fails, or
The difference is power suppli
>> And silent memory corruption can make its way to the filesystem, or
>> applications' internal saved data structures (such as the contents
>> of a VM's registry database).
> Since we don't hear about Mac mini server users screaming about how
> their servers are constantly crashing, the severi
With RAID 4, the parity disk IOPS on write will rate-limit the whole LUN...
No big deal on a 4-drive LUN; terror on a 15-drive LUN...
George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 14, 2012, at 8:04, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Jeroen van Aart said:
>> There may be a performan
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 01:46:29 -0500, Joe Greco said:
> Since we don't hear about Mac mini server users screaming about how
> their servers are constantly crashing, the severity and frequency of
Googling for 'mac mini server crash' gets about 11.6M hits. I gave up after
10 pages of results, but up
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
> > The current Mac mini "Server" model sports an i7 2.0GHz quad-core CPU
> > and up to 16GB RAM (see OWC for that, IIRC). =A0Two drives, up to 750GB
> > each, or SSD's if you prefer.
>
> The Mac mini server is quite intringuing with that low po
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
> The current Mac mini "Server" model sports an i7 2.0GHz quad-core CPU
> and up to 16GB RAM (see OWC for that, IIRC). Two drives, up to 750GB
> each, or SSD's if you prefer.
The Mac mini server is quite intringuing with that low power
requiremen
Once upon a time, Jeroen van Aart said:
> There may be a performance penalty using raid4, because it uses one
> parity disk. Although that system looks like it can be useful for some
> purposes it looks less ideal for home use. Also I don't see how it would
> allow you to install your own OS.
PC wrote:
It exists. Google for "unRAID" It uses something like Raid4 for Parity
data, but stores entire files on single spindles. It's designed for home
media server type environments. This way, when you watch a video, only the
There may be a performance penalty using raid4, because it use
It exists. Google for "unRAID" It uses something like Raid4 for Parity
data, but stores entire files on single spindles. It's designed for home
media server type environments. This way, when you watch a video, only the
drive you are using needs to power up. It also lets you add/remove
mismatch
Leo Bicknell wrote:
But what's really missing is storage management. RAID5 (and similar)
require all drives to be online all the time. I'd love an intelligent
file system that could spin down drives when not in use, and even for
many workloads spin up only a portion of the drives. It's easy to
I like the Juniper EX2200C switches. They are only 12-port, but have 2 SFPs.
They are very low power, and have no fans.
However, I am still waiting (it has been several months) for them to send me
the correct rack mount brackets (which are a separate purchase).
-Randy
--
| Randy Carpenter
|
On Thursday, February 23, 2012 04:53:06 PM Joe Greco wrote:
> So, good group to ask, probably... anyone have suggestions for a low-
> noise, low-power GigE switch in the 24-port range ... managed, with SFP?
> That doesn't require constant rebooting?
I can't comment to the rebooting, but a couple
> I've spent a fair amount of time working on energy effiency at home.
> While I've had a rack at my house in the distant past, the cooling
> and power bill have always made me work at down sizing. Also, as
> time went by I became more obsessed with quite fans, or in particular
> fanless designs.
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> I'd love a low powered motherboard with 6-8 SATA, and a case with
> perhaps 6 hot swap bays but designed for a low powered, fanless
> motherboard. IX Systems's FreeNAS Mini is the closest I've seen,
> but it tops out at 4 drives.
Look at Su
In a message written on Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 01:13:47PM -0800, Jeroen van Aart
wrote:
> After reading a number of threads where people list their huge and
> wasteful, but undoubtedly fun (and sometimes necessary?), home setups
> complete with dedicated rooms and aircos I felt inclined to ask who
On Wednesday, February 22, 2012 04:13:47 PM Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Any suggestions and ideas appreciated of course. :-)
www.aleutia.com
DC-powered everything, including a 12VDC LCD monitor. We're getting one of
their D2 Pro dual core Atoms (they have other options for more money) for a
solar
On 02/22/12 21:13, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> I felt inclined to ask who has attempted to make a really energy
> efficient setup?
My current always-on home server is:
- 3U rackmount box, Supermicro H8SGL, 450 watt '80-plus platinum' PSU
- 8-core Opteron 6128 _underclocked_ to 800Mhz
- 16 GB of EC
--As of February 22, 2012 3:48:42 PM -0600, Joe Greco is alleged to have
said:
Right now my always on server is a VIA artigo 1100 pico-itx system
(replacing the G4 system) and my "router/firewall/modem" is still the el
cheapo DSL modem (which runs busybox by the way). I have an upgraded
worksta
Marcel Plug wrote:
No issues so far. As I said though, I don't push it too hard. I
don't have any specs or stats off hand, so I can't get any more
detailed.
What's the speed like?
I'm pretty happy with them, I just wish my DLink would stop requiring reboots...
I assume you connected it to
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
>
> I wonder how reliable the storage is in these things. Is it comparable to
> modern SSDs?
No issues so far. As I said though, I don't push it too hard. I
don't have any specs or stats off hand, so I can't get any more
detailed.
I use a
Joe Greco wrote:
Quite frankly, it's a little horrifying how quickly people have embraced
not owning their own resources. On one hand, sure, it's great not to have
to worry about some aspects of it all, but on the other hand...
The web sites that we entrust our data to can, and do, vanish:
> On 22 Feb 2012, at 22:04, "Stefan Bethke" wrote:
> > Am 22.02.2012 um 22:48 schrieb Joe Greco:
> >=20
> >> You also don't have to
> >> buy a MMS; the lower end Mac mini's are also plenty powerful, can be
> >> upgraded similarly, but lack OS X Server and the quad core CPU.
> >=20
> > With 10.7, S
On 22 Feb 2012, at 22:40, "Jeroen van Aart" wrote:
> Leigh Porter wrote:
>> You dudes need to get with the times and put all this stuff in the cloud.
>> Ok so I joke a little..
>
> The "cloud" seems to be a more modern implementation of the mainframe
> "paradigm" (and now I feel soiled having
Marcel Plug wrote:
I've run a SheevaPlug at home for a few years now. I don't do
anything fancy with it, but it does what I need it to do. Mostly that
I wonder how reliable the storage is in these things. Is it comparable
to modern SSDs?
Oh and I also have native IPv6 on my DSL. I like t
Leigh Porter wrote:
You dudes need to get with the times and put all this stuff in the cloud.
Ok so I joke a little..
The "cloud" seems to be a more modern implementation of the mainframe
"paradigm" (and now I feel soiled having used 2 such words in one
sentence). It has its uses, though it'
> Am 22.02.2012 um 22:48 schrieb Joe Greco:
> > You also don't have to
> > buy a MMS; the lower end Mac mini's are also plenty powerful, can be
> > upgraded similarly, but lack OS X Server and the quad core CPU.
>
> With 10.7, Server is now a $50 add-on download from the Mac App Store, no
> speci
On 22 Feb 2012, at 22:04, "Stefan Bethke" wrote:
> Am 22.02.2012 um 22:48 schrieb Joe Greco:
>
>> You also don't have to
>> buy a MMS; the lower end Mac mini's are also plenty powerful, can be
>> upgraded similarly, but lack OS X Server and the quad core CPU.
>
> With 10.7, Server is now a $50
I've run a SheevaPlug at home for a few years now. I don't do
anything fancy with it, but it does what I need it to do. Mostly that
is file server, web server, jump-box for network testing. Also
testing different linux software for this and that... (Quagga runs
nicely, but won't hold a full BGP
Am 22.02.2012 um 22:48 schrieb Joe Greco:
> You also don't have to
> buy a MMS; the lower end Mac mini's are also plenty powerful, can be
> upgraded similarly, but lack OS X Server and the quad core CPU.
With 10.7, Server is now a $50 add-on download from the Mac App Store, no
special hardware r
> Right now my always on server is a VIA artigo 1100 pico-itx system
> (replacing the G4 system) and my "router/firewall/modem" is still the el
> cheapo DSL modem (which runs busybox by the way). I have an upgraded
> workstation that's "sometimes on", it has a mini itx form factor (AMD
> phenom
48 matches
Mail list logo
