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