3 ms·
>>> they might have been too scared to write it. When looking back on the origin of RAID, one of the original developers confessed, “It really wasn’t made to la
by lifeisstillgood 7y ago
>>> they might have been too scared to write it. When looking back on the origin of RAID, one of the original developers confessed, “It really wasn’t made to last that long. Sorry!”
This speaks to me - too many times we think we need clever architecture and well thought out methodologies and ... the most useful tools are a mix of inspiration and timing and luck.
Had the developers stopped to plan they would have built something with over 16 bits of primary key - and also made a hundred other "improvements" that would have destroyed all the value MS got out of it.
There is a point in this - it I am not sure I know what it is.
- hermitdev 7y ago> Had the developers stopped to plan they would have built something with over 16 bits of primary key While true, this was in the 16-bit, Windows 1.x era. Also the ~640kb of RAM era (disks also werent that big either, DOS (v3.x) around that time only supported 32 MB partitions). Not sure which version of DOS Windows 1.0 ran on, I didnt use windows until v3.11 for Workgroups. A 32-bit primary key would likely have been seen as wasteful (not that I'm excusing it) and impractical, because you could likely never practically store more than 64k records on a PC of the day (and even if you could, you wouldnt have an disk left to do anything else).
- gdwatson 7y agoHe didn’t say which platform it ran on. Was Microsoft still using Xenix internally at the time?
- exikyut 7y agoYes, for a time Xenix was used for some proportion of internal development, IIRC for DOS. I think I read that on here somewhere. I unfortunately don't have a citation. Need to get a time machine to take me to whatever point in the future I sort out my bookmarks ._.
- lozaning 7y agoOn the other hand, temporary fixes are often the most permanent kind.