On 2/6/2011 12:42 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > My current thinking is that we should have some relatively large > limit....maybe on the order of 64k? It seems like it'd be very difficult to > hit such a limit with any sort of legitimate use case, and the chances of > some subtle data-dependent error would be much less. But a 1GB key is just > not going to work well in any implementation (if it doesn't simply oom the > process!). So despite what I said earlier, I guess I think we should have > some limit...but keep it an order of magnitude or two larger than what we > expect any legitimate usage to hit just to keep the system as flexible as > possible. > > Does that sound reasonable to people? Are we thinking about making this a MUST requirement, or a SHOULD? I'm hesitant to spec an exact size as a MUST given how technology has a way of changing in unexpected ways that makes old constraints obsolete. But then, I may just be overly concerned about this too. Cheers, Shawn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:16 UTC