On 06/11/2017 22:44, Jeff Gilbert wrote: > Price matters, since every dollar we spend chasing ECC would be a > dollar we can't allocate towards perf improvements, hardware refresh > rate, or simply more machines for any build clusters we may want.
And every day our developers or IT staff waste chasing apparently random issues is a waste of both money and time. > The paper linked above addresses massive compute clusters, which seems > to have limited implications for our use-cases. The clusters are 6000 and 8500 nodes respectively, quite small by today's standards. How many developers do we have? Hundreds for sure, it could be a thousand looking at our current headcount so we're in the same ballpark. > Nearly every machine we do development on does not currently use ECC. > I don't see why that should change now. Not true. The current Xeon E5-based ThinkStation P710 available from Service Now has ECC memory and so did the previous models in the last five years. Having a workstation available w/o ECC would actually be a step backwards. > To me, ECC for desktop compute > workloads crosses the line into jumping at shadows, since "restart > your machine slightly more often than otherwise" is not onerous. Do you have data to prove that this is not an issue? Gabriele
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
