From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <56bdfd682af03e2cf62bd4473efc7599@mightycheese.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] seek() in fossil?
From: "rob pike, esq." <rob@mightycheese.com>
In-Reply-To: <3d1b4126560a1275cfc5b04714fafe12@plan9.bell-labs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 11:18:55 -0800
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 47caf97a-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

This reminds me of the IPv6 fools, who seemed to think that
if 2^48 wasn't quite enough, they should go for 2^64 but just
to be sure, double it to 2^128.

Do you know how big 2^64 is?  It's not twice as big as a gigabyte.
Let's say we had a gigabit ethernet and we wanted to write a 2^64
byte file.  It would take more than a thousand years.

-rob