I think
1) You have the units wrong: these appear to be the figures quoted for KB
of compressed files, and the compression is nothing like 1024:1.
2) This is not `a series' unless you add a time base, e.g. via a call
to ts().
Surely subscribers are aware that they do not get many MB/day and
On 26-Feb-05 Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
I think
1) You have the units wrong: these appear to be the figures
quoted for KB of compressed files, and the compression is
nothing like 1024:1.
Sorry, yes, you are correct: it is KB and not MB (a slip of the
eye on my part).
2) This is not `a
Ted.Harding at nessie.mcc.ac.uk writes:
:
: Hi Folks,
:
: While I was browsing in the R-help archives yesterday,
: I got curious about the time series of the sizes of
: the monthly archives in MB.
:
: This turned out to have an unexpected feature or two,
: which I leave to readers to explore
Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
I think
1) You have the units wrong: these appear to be the figures quoted for
KB of compressed files, and the compression is nothing like 1024:1.
2) This is not `a series' unless you add a time base, e.g. via a call to
ts().
Surely subscribers are aware that they do
On 26-Feb-05 Uwe Ligges wrote:
So let's be immensely unfair and do some speculation ...
Assuming 1000MB/month means a compressed archive file of (very)
*roughly* 250MB.
Looking at the data with linear models,
lm(sqrt(MB) ~ monthindex)
seems not to be the worst model (removing the
