|
|
|
|
|
by monocasa
2810 days ago
|
|
That study is faulty. The intern who did that study didn't know that Google would buy DRAM chips that failed manufacturers QA, but them on DIMMs themselves, and retest them at lower frequencies and with ECC turned on. When they already have to be tolerant of any node failing because of their scale, they can start playing fast and loose with this sort of thing if it makes financial sense. EDIT: At -3 so far, does anyone want to explain the downvotes? I saw the google slides first hand, and there are comments from 2009 in that article saying the same thing. |
|
Your comment provided no substantiation of your claim, merely hand-waving, while casting aspersions on someone else's work.