Received: from localhost (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 808F99FB577 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:13:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 64659-04 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:13:46 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from mailrelay.edis.at (mailrelay.edis.at [81.223.48.5]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 118189FB4EB for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:13:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [81.0.121.133] (a2165.adsl.pool.eol.hu [::ffff:81.0.121.133]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 zb@cybertec.at) by mailrelay.edis.at with esmtp; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:16:30 +0200 id 000DCCD4.4669AB0E.0000524E Message-ID: <4669AA7B.7060107@cybertec.at> Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:14:03 +0200 From: Zoltan Boszormenyi User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070530) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mark@mark.mielke.cc CC: "Joshua D. Drake" , Dave Cramer , Guy Rouillier , postgresql performance list Subject: Re: [OT] Re: How much ram is too much References: <47A154B5-496C-478A-B60D-4238AF12EAC6@fastcrypt.com> <466987CD.7040408@burntmail.com> <46829B73-CF97-400B-8FA6-67A16F68BCAB@fastcrypt.com> <46699422.7080209@cybertec.at> <46699B89.4080900@commandprompt.com> <4669A5EF.8030805@cybertec.at> <20070608190025.GA23093@mark.mielke.cc> In-Reply-To: <20070608190025.GA23093@mark.mielke.cc> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200706/172 X-Sequence-Number: 25205 mark@mark.mielke.cc írta: > On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 08:54:39PM +0200, Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote: > >> Joshua D. Drake írta: >> >>> Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote: >>> >>>> Dave Cramer írta: >>>> >>>>> It's an IBM x3850 using linux redhat 4.0 >>>>> >>>> Isn't that a bit old? I have a RedHat 4.2 somewhere >>>> that was bundled with Applixware 3. :-) >>>> >>> He means redhat ES/AS 4 I assume. >>> >> I guessed that, hence the smiley. >> But it's very unfortunate that version numbers >> are reused - it can cause confusion. >> There was a RH 4.0 already a long ago, >> when the commercial and the community >> version were the same. I think Microsoft >> will avoid reusing its versions when year 2095 comes. :-) >> > > He should have written RHEL 4.0. RH 4.0 is long enough ago, though, > that I think few would assume it meant the much older release. > Yes. But up until RHEL 8.0/9.0 ( or plain 9 without decimals ;-) ) I can make cheap jokes telling that I can give you a free upgrade. :-) > You'll find a similar thing with products like "CuteFTP 7.0" or > "CuteFTP Pro 3.0". > I am sure there are others, too. But enough of this OT, I am really interested in the main thread's topic. Best regards, -- ---------------------------------- Zoltán Böszörményi Cybertec Geschwinde & Schönig GmbH http://www.postgresql.at/