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 decibel@decibel.org
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?"
