From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:50319 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752114AbaASUzF (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Jan 2014 15:55:05 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1W4zOY-0006UI-H9 for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:55:02 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:55:02 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:55:02 +0100 To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: Re: btrfs and ECC RAM Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 20:54:38 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1420240.1BEopi7BrR@merkaba> <52DC3386.7020502@chinilu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: George Mitchell posted on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 12:20:22 -0800 as excerpted: > Just my opinion, of course, but I simply cannot imagine how "an > incorrect checksum could appear correct due to a memory error". Sorry, > but I just cannot get my brain around that one. The odds against it > happening would be beyond comprehension. I can easily imagine btrfs > taking a system down due to memory error, but not btrfs causing data > corruption due to a memory error. What he said. =:^) Seriously, the odds must be on the scale of hitting the lottery, if not further out. And from what I've read, people have a better chance at getting hit by lightening than hitting the lottery. So, umm... "y'all" draggin' around a lightening rod, with an insulated handle of course and keeping it touching earth at all times, just in case? -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman