I'm going to go with option B, 20,000. While 100,000 might be possible, I feel like that's pushing the limits a bit. 20,000 sounds more realistic and within the capabilities of a typical distributed deployment. But hey, what do I know? I'm just guessing here.
I think option D, 100,000, sounds the most reasonable. Distributed deployments are designed to handle large-scale workloads, so 100,000 concurrent endpoints doesn't seem too far-fetched. But I'm not 100% sure, to be honest.
Haha, yeah, Rahim's going big or going home, that's for sure. But hey, you never know, maybe he's secretly a distributed deployment genius. Or maybe he's just really good at guessing. Either way, I've got to give him props for his confidence!
Whoa, 500,000? That's like having an entire city's population as your concurrent endpoints. I admire your optimism, Rahim, but I think you might be reaching a little too far there. Maybe we should all just take a deep breath and try to think this through logically.
upvoted 0 times
...
Log in to Pass4Success
Sign in:
Report Comment
Is the comment made by USERNAME spam or abusive?
Commenting
In order to participate in the comments you need to be logged-in.
You can sign-up or
login
Kate
6 months agoEdna
6 months agoMargurite
6 months agoDetra
6 months agoVernell
6 months agoKaran
6 months agoHector
6 months agoMaurine
7 months agoBeatriz
7 months agoLisandra
7 months agoNickolas
8 months agoFranklyn
8 months agoGail
7 months agoElvera
8 months agoJeannetta
8 months agoDarrel
8 months agoGlynda
8 months agoKanisha
8 months agoAmie
8 months agoGlynda
8 months agoDwight
8 months ago