More than a TB of RAM

MS DOS broke it's boundaries. BILL did it, why wouldn't more complex systems and the slew of open source Gurus be able to do it, EVEN if physical addressing has limitations based on computing architecture. Besides you were just saying you read about it somewhere, hell I do that all the time. This will help; Go listen to WW3 track one, Make War on the IRC channel. :D

Oops just looked at dates; I am a week late, but hey next time throw in page files, and virutal memory addressing even on the Alpha the 32 bit architecture was bumped up to 43 bits using VMS. Tossing that aside the "physical" address of a 64 bit processor is WAY beyond a single terabyte even if Linux hasn't caught up. Then if you scale a system with multiple processors using AIX or something there is no way to tell the limitations of addressable memory. Suppose you build an 8-way S70??? And that's not virtualizing anything in the sense of overcoming a single processor limitation.

Hell to my knowledge specifications aren't even in order yet. Unix spec 2 doesn't define it and neither does the LP64 Data model.

Next time smack em and let them no in basics that 18 petabytes is conceivable. In Nuclear simulations Terabytes have been around for a while where ENTiRE databases are stored in memory alone. What server/channel?