From: Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: Is this still accurate?
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 10:33:23 -0800
References: 
 <4fe11dc1b660433594624b280b8ad832@SC58MEXGP036.CORP.CHARTERCOM.com>
 <3d7cd4673a80438798ad20b83411e3ca@SC58MEXGP001.CORP.CHARTERCOM.com>
 <1646547df04f4555a548ad7815208d5f@SC58MEXGP036.CORP.CHARTERCOM.com>
 <20180105175438.GO2416@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <68e5e2554e2240c6a22bd384fa7c9659@SC58MEXGP036.CORP.CHARTERCOM.com>
 <20180105180019.GP2416@tamriel.snowman.net>
To: "pgsql-docs@postgresql.org" <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <20180105180019.GP2416@tamriel.snowman.net>
Message-Id: <7F963E79-CF4F-4E93-AA46-36E1817332D0@blighty.com>
Precedence: bulk


> On Jan 5, 2018, at 10:00 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>=20
> Greetings,
>=20
> * Moser, Glen G (Glen.Moser@charter.com) wrote:
>> That's really the gist of the concern from a team member of mine.  =
Not that the 4TB number is wrong but that it could be misleading to =
assume that 4TB is some sort of upper bound.
>>=20
>> That's how this concern was relayed to me and I am just following up.
>=20
> Well, saying 'in excess of' is pretty clear, but I don't think the
> sentence is really adding much either, so perhaps we should just =
remove
> it.

It's been useful a few times to reassure people that we can handle =
"large"
databases operationally, rather than just having large theoretical =
limits.

Updating it would be great, or wrapping a little more verbiage around =
the
4TB number, but a mild -1 on removing it altogether.

Cheers,
  Steve=