Re: 2GB limit of memory for Oracle on WIndows 32 bit

From: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 21:34:53 -0000
Message-ID: <1183584893.067065.327080@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>

On Jul 2, 7:28 pm, Frank van Bortel <frank.van.bor..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Niall Litchfield wrote:
> > On Jun 29, 9:07 pm, Frank van Bortel <frank.van.bor..._at_gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
>
> >>> and applications. Each 32-bit application can access up to 2 GB of
> >>> addressable memory space, which is large enough to support even the
> >>> largest desktop application.
> >> L'histoire se repete... Didn't I hear something similar on the
> >> 640kB address model?
>
> > No. Well you almost certainly did but inaccurately.
>
> >http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=91182for example.
>
> Well - I don't believe that, either, because only 256k was
> allocated to "special" purposes (the I/O map, to be exact)
> Some models, running MS/DOS, ran with 768kB of memory, and
> could *use* it (to run Oracle V4, for example).

well doesn't it seem just a teensy bit unlikely that if msdos machines ran with 768k memory then the quote may not have happened. Still since it was a 1981 quote (in a newspaper according to some sources) I'm sure it will be found if I'm wrong. This group has enough people who don't like ms products and are sticklers for accuracy after all.

> The TI Professional Computer was such a machine. That fact
> does not comply with the quoted article.
>
> MS has been twisting history before (not to use the word rewrite,
> which is too strong), and has always bee excellent in marketing.
>
>
>
> > I do like the idea of Oracle as a desktop application though :)
>
> And I stated AutoCAD as an example, not Oracle.

It was charles I was quoting, and hopefully ironically.

>
> > Niall
>
> I guess this will soon also be one of those 'never said 2GB was enough'
> things.
>
> Bottom line is - you'll never have enough memory. There will always be
> a product that uses more. Just like CPU power.

Indeed. And often it will be windows :( Received on Wed Jul 04 2007 - 16:34:53 CDT