Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors - Linux

This is a discussion on Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors - Linux ; "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I worked we would start getting untracable errors that would stop after the linux servers were rebooted. This would happen after about 200 days of uptime." Posted by: Jeff C ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

  1. Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I worked we
    would start getting untracable errors that would stop after the linux
    servers were rebooted. This would happen after about 200 days of uptime."

    Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM

    http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso..._uptime_a.html




  2. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    DFS wrote:

    > "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I worked
    > we would start getting untracable errors that would stop after the linux
    > servers were rebooted. This would happen after about 200 days of uptime."
    >
    > Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM
    >
    >

    http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso..._uptime_a.html

    Of course he's telling the truth, right???

    Who is this Jeff C??? Is it you, DFS?

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  3. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:29:10 +1100, Gregory Shearman wrote:

    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I
    >> worked we would start getting untracable errors that would stop after
    >> the linux servers were rebooted. This would happen after about 200 days
    >> of uptime."
    >>
    >> Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM
    >>
    >>

    > http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso...hives/2005/12/

    linux_uptime_a.html
    >
    > Of course he's telling the truth, right???
    >
    > Who is this Jeff C??? Is it you, DFS?


    I'm thinking that there's somethign wrong with the RAM

  4. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 18:26:17 -0500, DFS scribbled down:

    > "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I worked we
    > would start getting untracable errors that would stop after the linux
    > servers were rebooted. This would happen after about 200 days of uptime."
    >
    > Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM
    >
    > http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso..._uptime_a.html


    So how many mysterious Windows problems are solved by a "reboot" or worse yet, a "re-install" of the OS?

    Something about stones and glass houses comes to mind.


    --
    Ubuntu Linux
    21:52:35 up 131 days, 10:07, 0 users, load average: 0.19, 0.20, 0.14

    Beware the one behind you.


    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  5. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    Jon Nesbit wrote:
    > On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 18:26:17 -0500, DFS scribbled down:
    >
    >> "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I
    >> worked we would start getting untracable errors that would stop
    >> after the linux servers were rebooted. This would happen after about
    >> 200 days of uptime."
    >>
    >> Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM
    >>
    >> http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso..._uptime_a.html

    >
    > So how many mysterious Windows problems are solved by a "reboot" or
    > worse yet, a "re-install" of the OS?
    >
    > Something about stones and glass houses comes to mind.


    I don't deny I'm quite visible through the walls of my Windows house, but
    that doesn't alleviate the responsibility of the cola Linux dwellers to
    cover up their nudity in their own glass houses.




  6. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    alt wrote:

    > On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:29:10 +1100, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I
    >>> worked we would start getting untracable errors that would stop after
    >>> the linux servers were rebooted. This would happen after about 200 days
    >>> of uptime."
    >>>
    >>> Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM
    >>>
    >>>

    >> http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso...hives/2005/12/

    > linux_uptime_a.html
    >>
    >> Of course he's telling the truth, right???
    >>
    >> Who is this Jeff C??? Is it you, DFS?

    >
    > I'm thinking that there's somethign wrong with the RAM


    More likely an "in house" program that doesn't free memory or other
    resources like it's supposed to... Of course, it's Linux's fault....



    --

    Jerry McBride (jmcbride@mail-on.us)

  7. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    Gregory Shearman wrote:
    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I
    >> worked we would start getting untracable errors that would stop
    >> after the linux servers were rebooted. This would happen after about
    >> 200 days of uptime."
    >>
    >> Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM
    >>
    >>

    > http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso..._uptime_a.html
    >
    > Of course he's telling the truth, right???


    I hope so.


    > Who is this Jeff C??? Is it you, DFS?


    There's only one DFS...





  8. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    DFS wrote:

    > Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I
    >>> worked we would start getting untracable errors that would stop
    >>> after the linux servers were rebooted. This would happen after about
    >>> 200 days of uptime."
    >>>
    >>> Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM
    >>>
    >>>

    >>

    http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso..._uptime_a.html
    >>
    >> Of course he's telling the truth, right???

    >
    > I hope so.
    >
    >
    >> Who is this Jeff C??? Is it you, DFS?

    >
    > There's only one DFS...


    One more than necessary.

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  9. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    alt wrote:

    > On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:29:10 +1100, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> "No problems with memory fragmentation? Must be lucky. One place I
    >>> worked we would start getting untracable errors that would stop after
    >>> the linux servers were rebooted. This would happen after about 200 days
    >>> of uptime."
    >>>
    >>> Posted by: Jeff C at March 1, 2007 05:31 AM
    >>>
    >>>

    >> http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso...hives/2005/12/

    > linux_uptime_a.html
    >>
    >> Of course he's telling the truth, right???
    >>
    >> Who is this Jeff C??? Is it you, DFS?

    >
    > I'm thinking that there's somethign wrong with the RAM


    I think that "Jeff C" made up the story out of full cloth

    "Untraceable mem problems"

    Yes. Certainly

    And it took a DFS to post that garbage
    --
    Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
    If it starts working, we'll fix it. Pronto.


  10. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    DFS did eloquently scribble:
    > There's only one DFS...


    You're wrong.

    There're dozens of DFSs.
    There're branches all over the country.
    And all of them seem to be having the same perpetual sale that started in
    about 1989.
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
    | in | suck is probably the day they start making |
    | Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  11. Re: Reboot mysteriously fixes Linux memory errors

    Gregory Shearman wrote:
    > DFS wrote:


    >> There's only one DFS...

    >
    > One more than necessary.


    Is that sentence "as good as possible"?




+ Reply to Thread