From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3C47158089 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 00:51:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8EFFE2BC030; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 00:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost01a.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost01a.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EB662BC013 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 00:51:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=wstn.localnet) by smarthost01a.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qilQp-0002tf-AU for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 00:51:07 +0000 From: Peter Humphrey To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] PCIe x1 or PCIe x4 SATA controller card Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 01:51:07 +0100 Message-ID: <5716784.DvuYhMxLoT@wstn> In-Reply-To: <5985789.lOV4Wx5bFT@wstn> References: <57322874-e9c0-2f2c-8994-43438fe72995@gmail.com> <5985789.lOV4Wx5bFT@wstn> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Originating-smarthost01a-IP: [82.69.80.10] Feedback-ID: 82.69.80.10 X-Archives-Salt: 98774cf0-6d82-400e-b258-151fb5c52223 X-Archives-Hash: 92237d6633a0fc7d1a9b837bdc1846f4 On Tuesday, 19 September 2023 14:40:24 BST Peter Humphrey wrote: > My machine was built by Armari, and it has 64GB. Even that isn't enough to > accommodate more than one huge package emerge at a time - which is why I'd > like to see the new feature I've been bleating about. I might ask them if I > can double it. It turns out that I can double it to 128 GB, but at a cost of course. I'm now musing over whether I can justify it. I'll also have to consider whether portage can make effective use of it. I also discovered that Armari are a big player. They've supplied well over 100 huge systems to CERN for the LHC. I wish I had CERN's money! :) -- Regards, Peter.