From owner-freebsd-questions  Sat Jul  5 01:08:59 1997
Return-Path: <owner-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA27191
          for questions-outgoing; Sat, 5 Jul 1997 01:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implode.root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA27186
          for <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 5 Jul 1997 01:08:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by implode.root.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA00440;
	Sat, 5 Jul 1997 01:10:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199707050810.BAA00440@implode.root.com>
To: Carey Nairn <cpn@ccd.tas.gov.au>
cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: EDO vs non-parity RAM 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 05 Jul 1997 12:30:36 +1000."
             <Pine.BSF.3.96.970705122733.17105A-100000@krondor.cpn.org.au> 
From: David Greenman <dg@root.com>
Reply-To: dg@root.com
Date: Sat, 05 Jul 1997 01:10:44 -0700
Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>I suppose this has been asked before somewhere but I can't find it right
>now...
>
>I want to know which is the preferable RAM type to use for FreeBSD.  I
>have heard people say don't use EDO but the reasons seem to be a bit
>vague.  Is EDO better/worse or more/less reliable than normal non-parity
>RAM ?

   It has the same reliability, but most EDO SIMMs are only available in non-
parity versions. Non-parity is just as reliable as parity RAM, but with parity
your system will crash if it detects a parity error, which many people believe
is superior to continuing to run with the bad bit(s).

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project