3 Oct
2016
3 Oct
'16
9:13 a.m.
On Oct 3, 2016, at 12:07 PM, william degnan
<billdegnan at gmail.com> wrote:
...
I should have been more precise, but my point is that this is a non-parity
RAM basic 11/35 system useful for peripheral interfacing and
communications. As is, not good for something like RT11.
I wouldn't look at it this way. Non-parity memory is fine for any application if you
judge the risk of memory error to be low enough for that application. Peripheral
interfacing or communications may or may not be such an application. An application
running on RT11 may or may not be. The OS isn't what decides this, but rather the
requirements of the application: the expected bit error rate for the memory technology in
use vs. the failure rate that's tolerable for the application.
paul