3 ms·
Yes, I understand that. The reason to run memtest on ECC memory is to verify that every bit of memory is good before you finish building the system, installing
by Amezarak 11y ago
Yes, I understand that.
The reason to run memtest on ECC memory is to verify that every bit of memory is good before you finish building the system, installing an OS, and putting it into production. If you have, say, 32GB of memory, there's no guarantee you'll hit those bad bits for ECC to log an error until you're doing something memory intensive two weeks later.
The primary use case of ECC is to handle random bit flips from cosmic rays and whatnot, not to mitigate bad hardware. If you have bad memory, replace it, don't rely on ECC. The only way to test memory is to run something like memtest, where you read and write from every bit in memory.
If you're OK with finding out a month later that ECC is logging a hundred uncorrectable errors an hour whenever you do anything memory intensive, then sure, don't bother memtesting. If you would rather deal with it beforehand, then run memtest.
- KaiserPro 11y agobut you have hardware monitoring linked to an alerting framework right?
- Amezarak 11y agoYes, but again, you may not get that alert and find out that memory module is bad until months from now. It all depends on where the chip is bad at, how much is bad, how much load is usually on the system, etc. I (and I would guess most people) don't want to find out a month (or more, potentially much more) from now that the memory module is bad, I want to know now so I can RMA it and get it over with without having to take a running system down and apart. That's the problem that memtest solves, ECC does not solve the same problem at all.