Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 7/1/84; site amd.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!amd!phil From: phil@amd.UUCP (Phil Ngai) Newsgroups: net.micro Subject: Re: net.digital: Is parity *really* worth it? Message-ID: <157@amd.UUCP> Date: Sat, 4-Aug-84 02:56:27 EDT Article-I.D.: amd.157 Posted: Sat Aug 4 02:56:27 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 4-Aug-84 23:57:41 EDT References: <678@sbcs.UUCP> <694@vax1.fluke.UUCP> Organization: AMD, Santa Clara, CA Lines: 18 > The primary disadvantage of parity is soft errors. Hm, I consider this an advantage. Hard errors are easy to catch. The thing I consider most important about parity is that it catchs the soft errors which would otherwise corrupt my data WITHOUT my knowing it. If you keep good backups as you should then the important thing is knowing that your data can be trusted. Parity is a big step towards this. Even for 8 chips worth. I would think that most users would be willing to accept the tradeoff once it is explained to them. -- I'm going to keep boring until I strike oil. Phil Ngai (408) 982-6554 UUCPnet: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amd!phil ARPAnet: amd!phil@decwrl.ARPA