Re: 4 billion record limit?

From: Bradley Kieser <brad(at)kieser(dot)net>
To: "Prasanth A(dot) Kumar" <kumar1(at)home(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 4 billion record limit?
Date: 2000-07-27 10:05:36
Message-ID: E13HkXo-0001Je-00@kieser.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-novice

My mistake! ;-)
I remember wondering who would ever need more that the 16K that the Sinclair Spectrum could give you!

Quoting "Prasanth A. Kumar" <kumar1(at)home(dot)com>:

> brad <brad(at)kieser(dot)net> writes:
>
> <snip>
> > Simply waiting for 64bit numbers is rather inelegant and also presumes
> usage
> > parameters for the database... remember Bill Gates saying that he
> couldn't
> > foresee any usage for more than 64MB of RAM? Besides which, PostgreSQL is
> the
> > best DB around... there's a high standard to maintain!
> <snip>
>
> Actually, he was purported to have said that nobody would need more
> that 640KB or ram, which was the limit of memory on MSDOS. Brings back
> memories... remember having to juggle the drivers on bootup to plays
> that game which wanted nearly all of the base memory but you still
> needed the mouse, soundcard and cdrom access? ;-)
>
> --
> Prasanth Kumar
> kumar1(at)home(dot)com
>

Bradley Kieser
Director
Kieser.net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Snow 2000-07-27 10:58:13 RE: 4 billion record limit?
Previous Message Bradley Kieser 2000-07-27 10:02:04 Re: 4 billion record limit?

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Snow 2000-07-27 10:58:13 RE: 4 billion record limit?
Previous Message Nicolas Kizilian 2000-07-27 10:04:36 timestamp and null value