On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 09:55:38AM -0800, Ron Mayer wrote: > I still suspect that the correct way to do it would not be > to use the single "correlation", but 2 stats - one for estimating > how sequential/random accesses would be; and one for estimating > the number of pages that would be hit. I think the existing > correlation does well for the first estimate; but for many data > sets, poorly for the second type. Should this be made a TODO? Is there some way we can estimate how much this would help without actually building it? -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?" ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
