3 ms·
> 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
by 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 ._.