> On Jan 5, 2018, at 10:00 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> * 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
couldbe 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