2013/1/18 Adam Jackson
> On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 20:49 +0200, cornel panceac wrote:
>
>
> > 2013/1/18 Justin M. Forbes
>
> > There are a lof of reasons that this isn't feasible on a
> > running system.
> > You just don't have access to all of the memory for a full
> >
On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 20:49 +0200, cornel panceac wrote:
> 2013/1/18 Justin M. Forbes
> There are a lof of reasons that this isn't feasible on a
> running system.
> You just don't have access to all of the memory for a full
> check.
>
> Justin
>
2013/1/18 Justin M. Forbes
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:18:40AM -0800, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R
> wrote:
> > Recently I discovered the motherboard that had been running omen.com
> > had an undetected bad memory chip. This is a real confidence builder.
> >
> > Currently, running a definitive
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:18:40AM -0800, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> Recently I discovered the motherboard that had been running omen.com
> had an undetected bad memory chip. This is a real confidence builder.
>
> Currently, running a definitive memory test requires hours of down time
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:01:41 -0800
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> >
> Option 2 has already been tried. The old motherboard was checked
> with memtest86+ before being placed in service running omen.com.
>
Maybe use an out of box solution:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IomAerbV7g
--
On 01/17/2013 09:35 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:18:40 -0800
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
Recently I discovered the motherboard that had been running omen.com
had an undetected bad memory chip. This is a real confidence
builder.
Currently, running a definitive memo
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:18:40 -0800
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> Recently I discovered the motherboard that had been running omen.com
> had an undetected bad memory chip. This is a real confidence
> builder.
>
> Currently, running a definitive memory test requires hours of down
> time.