Le 2012-08-14 04:35, Invisible a écrit :
>>> So you're saying that the fact that British Telecom plc could only
>>> afford
>>> 25.2GB of spinning disk for a mission-critical system means that they're
>>> "not big enough" to play with the Big Boys? :-P
>
>> How many power companies did BT get their power from? Was it
>> mission-critical enough that if one of the power plants exploded, they'd
>> still be online?
>
> It wasn't /that/ mission-critical. It was only their fault-reporting
> database, not one of the actual call routine systems or anything like that.
>
> Still, if it's as trivial as you claim to have multiple TB of RAM back
> in 1995, why didn't they do that?

Because they didn't need to.

If their fault reporting system was able to run just fine on a system 
using 1 raid array of 4GB disks, there was no need to have it run on a 
more powerful system. (Side note:  the PC I bought in 99 had a 20GB HD, 
so those 4.2GB disks were probably already a few years old.)

Also, 128GB is not multiple TB.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message