[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

# RE: Memory Card Corruption Problems

- To: <rcr@dieboldes.com>
- Subject: RE: Memory Card Corruption Problems
- From: "Ian S. Piper" <ian@dieboldes.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:01:41 -0600
- Importance: Normal
- In-Reply-To: <C82B97F44988D411B61600D0B73EAB806224@MLTSRV>

    That's great that we're going at this with resolve and cool heads.  And I
    understand the physics.  But software can stress hardware.  Perhaps we've
    pushed this design farther than it was intended to go.  Like running Windows
    NT on a 286 AT computer.

    I still need answers to my questions below.  I was hoping Tab or Guy might
    be able to answer them.

    Ian

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-rcr@dieboldes.com [mailto:owner-rcr@dieboldes.com]On Behalf Of Jeffrey
    W. Dean
    Sent: March 30, 2001 3:08 PM
    To: 'rcr@dieboldes.com'
    Subject: RE: Memory Card Corruption Problems

    Thanks for gathering this info - it adds greatly to the mix.  Remember that
    software, of and in itself, does not physically transfer electrical signals
    from the bus to the card.  Software does in fact have a large influence on
    data bus traffic and sequencing.  We're absolutely not going off half cocked
    and ASSuming anything.  Any design changes or retrofits will be based upon a
    rational analysis and a very high probability of a permanent solution.
    That's our track.

    Jeff

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From:	Ian S. Piper [SMTP:ian@dieboldes.com]
    > Sent:	Friday, March 30, 2001 1:03 PM
    > To:	rcr@dieboldes.com
    > Subject:	RE: Memory Card Corruption Problems
    >
    > There's one discrepancy in this theory.  Minnesota has experienced no
    > memory card corruptions using 1.95e firmware.
    >
    > I've spoken again with Cathi Smothers and Barry Herron inquiring about any
    > memory card corruption events that may have occurred in Minnesota during
    > their November elections.  They were the on-site Global support during
    > those elections.  They still state that there were no memory card
    > corruptions.  They are sure that if Washington, Dakota, or Anoka were to
    > experience any problems like this, they would have been notified of it
    > that day.  All of the 348 units in Minnesota are Visible Light.  With that
    > many units, you would expect at least 1% (3 to 4 units) to experience this
    > problem.
    >
    > Some accounts with 1.94w firmware have experienced memory card corruptions
    > upwards of 10%. (e.g., Fresno in November 1999).  Most others have
    > experienced an average of approximately 5% (this is a conservative
    > estimate on my part).
    >
    > How is 1.95e different from 1.94w?  Is 1.95 code based on 1.94 structure?
    > Or is 1.95 a complete re-write?
    >
    > Does it perform less multi-threading, and therefore have less data
    > traffic?
    >
    > I'd like to have this discrepancy explained before we start retrofitting
    > 15,000 AccuVote-OS units in the field.
    >
    > Ian
    >
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: owner-rcr@dieboldes.com [ <mailto:owner-rcr@dieboldes.com>]On Behalf Of
    > Jeffrey
    > W. Dean
    > Sent: March 29, 2001 4:41 PM
    > To: 'rcr@dieboldes.com'
    > Subject: Memory Card Corruption Problems
    >
    >
    > I've posted to this list to make sure everyone with an interest can see
    > what's going on.  Please read the attachment - we will provide timely
    > updates over the next few days as additional info becomes available.
    >
    > Jeff Dean
    >
    >  <<PA04.doc>>
    >
    >

- Follow-Ups:
  - Re: Memory Card Corruption Problems
    - From: Guy Lancaster <glanca@dieboldes.com>

- References:
  - RE: Memory Card Corruption Problems
    - From: "Jeffrey W. Dean" <jwdean@spectrumltd.com>

- Prev by Date: Re: Memory Card Corruption Problems
- Next by Date: Re: Memory Card Corruption Problems
- Index(es):
  - Chronological
  - Thread