From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 28 14:07:30 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BF4016A420 for ; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:07:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from peterjeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from mail15.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail15.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 839DE43D58 for ; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:07:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from peterjeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org (c220-239-19-236.belrs4.nsw.optusnet.com.au [220.239.19.236]) by mail15.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k0SE7O9I004973 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Sun, 29 Jan 2006 01:07:25 +1100 Received: from turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org (localhost.vk2pj.dyndns.org [127.0.0.1]) by turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0SE7OL1002506; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 01:07:24 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from peter@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org) Received: (from peter@localhost) by turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k0SE7Ong002505; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 01:07:24 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from peter) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 01:07:24 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy To: lars.tunkrans@bredband.net Message-ID: <20060128140724.GB2341@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <20060128101221.ZTBV8741.mxfep04.bredband.com@mxfep04> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060128101221.ZTBV8741.mxfep04.bredband.com@mxfep04> X-PGP-Key: http://members.optusnet.com.au/peterjeremy/pubkey.asc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re: dual vs single core opteron 100's X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:07:30 -0000 On Sat, 2006-Jan-28 11:12:21 +0100, lars.tunkrans@bredband.net wrote: > Seems to defeat the purpose , If you want to build a reliable > Server you want Registred ECC RAM. ( socket 940 ) > If you want to build a cheap desktop machine you want un-registred > non-ECC RAM. ( socket 939 ) According to the posting you quoted, you can have non-registered ECC RAM on a socket-939 so that provides a third alternative: A low-end server with limited RAM capacity using socket-939 and unregistered ECC RAM. > Only application I can think of for using non-reliable servers > built with socket 939 is compute clusters where you have several > hundred compute servers, and you are not dependent on whether an > individual server runs all the time. You probably still want ECC RAM so that you can rely on the answers that your compute server is providing. -- Peter Jeremy