> On Jan 5, 2018, at 10:00 AM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > > Greetings, > > * Moser, Glen G (glen.mo...@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. >> >> That's how this concern was relayed to me and I am just following up. > > 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
