Re: Impossible Database Design?
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:17:46 +0200
Message-ID: <446b7615$0$31647$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>
>
> If you don't put any limit in the dates you can specify, you
> still have the physical limits of the computer, as Bob pointed
> out. I think there are a lot of fine compromises; there are a
> *lot* of distinct values in a 64 bit number.
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:17:46 +0200
Message-ID: <446b7615$0$31647$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Marshall wrote:
> ... I am fairly confident that no software built during
> my lifetime will be in use 100,000 years from now; probably
> not even 1000 years from now.
:-)
http://www.collusion.org/Article.cfm?ID=329
>>Arbitrary limits where none are logically >>necessary have quite a track-record (640Kb anyone?).
>
>
> If you don't put any limit in the dates you can specify, you
> still have the physical limits of the computer, as Bob pointed
> out. I think there are a lot of fine compromises; there are a
> *lot* of distinct values in a 64 bit number.
Agreed. Received on Wed May 17 2006 - 21:17:46 CEST