Chris Browne wrote:
> _On The Other Hand_, there will be attributes that are *NOT* set in a
> more-or-less chronological order, and Segment Exclusion will be pretty
> useless for these attributes.
Really? I was hoping that it'd be useful for any data
with long runs of the same value repeated - regardless of ordering.
My biggest tables are clustered by zip/postal-code -- which means that
while the City, State, Country attributes aren't monotonically increasing
or decreasing; they are grouped tightly together. I'd expect all queries
for San Francisco to be able to come from at most 2 segments; and all queries
for Texas to be able to come from only a fraction of the whole.
If the segment sizes are configurable - I imagine this would even
be useful for other data - like a people table organized
by last_name,first_name. "John"'s may be scattered through out
the table -- but at least the John Smith's would all be on one
segment, while the Aaron-through-Jim Smith segments might get excluded.
Or am I missing something?
