On Jan 22, 2016 11:52 AM, "Colin Watson" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 09:09:10AM -0600, Dustin Kirkland wrote: > > According to the 502 servers surveyed, 97.2% use less than 1.5 GB of > > /tmp. > > I'm not expressing any particular view on the overall topic either way > here, but for the sake of accuracy, I believe that that is not in fact > what the data you collected says. It says that, at the point in time > when the data was collected, 97.2% of those servers were currently using > less than 1.5 GB of /tmp. Temporary files are temporary, and often > bursty; a single point sample might line up with the high-water-mark on > those servers, and it might not. But if you're going to quote > statistics to three significant figures, then people reading it might > reasonably expect more precision in their construction.
That's absolutely true and I've tried to accurately express that when I've quoted these stats. You've identified a sentence where the wording was poor. In fairness, I stated the caveats, including that one, up front in the detailed analysis published at: http://blog.dustinkirkland.com/2016/01/data-driven-analysis-tmp-on-tmpfs.html I should have written: Of the 502 servers surveyed, 97.2% were using less than 1.5 GB of /tmp (at the time the data was collected). Thanks for the note. Dustin > -- > Colin Watson [[email protected]] > > -- > ubuntu-devel mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
