Xref: utzoo comp.sys.next:17872 comp.arch:22836
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!stanford.edu!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!news
From: scott@poincare.geom.umn.edu (Scott S. Bertilson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next,comp.arch
Subject: parity is for farmers?
Message-ID: <1991May21.232331.24888@cs.umn.edu>
Date: 21 May 91 23:23:31 GMT
Sender: news@cs.umn.edu (News administrator)
Organization: Geometry Center, University of Minnesota
Lines: 13
Nntp-Posting-Host: poincare.geom.umn.edu


  Does anyone else get nervous about the fact that NeXT ships their machines
with 8 megabytes of non-parity memory?  Is memory so reliable today that
parity doesn't give enough benefit to bother with?  Does only ECC give a
strong enough guarantee - and that is too expensive, so we should just
go without?
  I might be paranoid, but I don't ever remember buying memory for a
"real" computer before that didn't have some sort of error checking
included.  Please help me to find a good answer to this question -
I've got to add memory to a number of NeXTStations and I'd sure prefer
to use parity memory, but not if it is a waste of time.
				Thanks..Scott S. Bertilson
					scott@geom.umn.edu