On Jan 22, 2016 11:52 AM, "Colin Watson" <cjwatson@ubuntu.com> 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 [cjwatson@ubuntu.com]
>
> --
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
