| 1 |
On Thursday 05 October 2006 20:22, Dmitry S. Makovey wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> thanks for sharing. One question I have - did you run memtest86 or |
| 4 |
> something similar at the time? The reason I'm asking - I ran |
| 5 |
> memtest86 on this machine and it showed nothing. I'm not entirely |
| 6 |
> sure how much I can trust memtest. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I've run memtest86+ a number of times and no errors were shown. There's a |
| 9 |
whole thread (either in this ML or in the forums) as to why memtest is not a |
| 10 |
foolproof test for your *system* as opposed to a memory module. Try to |
| 11 |
search around and look in Google too, in case you find it. There's |
| 12 |
alternative tests to memtest involving running some script (if I remember |
| 13 |
right). As I said, whichever test you run you need to make sure that it |
| 14 |
exercises your whole memory system (modules, controllers, swap). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Good luck. :) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
PS. My box would also crash in M$Windoze if the page file was being used |
| 19 |
(e.g. manipulating large sections of text or pictures), but not at the |
| 20 |
frequency of it crashing under Gentoo with a heavy emerge and updatedb taking |
| 21 |
place. |
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Regards, |
| 24 |
Mick |
Archives