Hi Ken (and All),
You may have seen the recent discussion regarding scaling, consistency
and support for dynamic behaviour within directories of archives. The
topic of how to treat archive boundaries with respect to scaling came up
as part of the discussion of whether and how to handle new archives
which may appear in the middle of the overall timeline while the context
is open.
Currently, the prototype treats archive boundaries as seamless. That is,
if we transition from Archive A to B while scaling some counter, the
last sample from A and the first same from B will be interpolated as if
they came from the same archive.
It has been suggested that the boundary actually represents a break in
the logging and that it should be treated as a virtual MARK record. Now
that I think about it, I am leaning toward this interpretation, since
the boundary does indeed represent a gap during which no logging was
performed.
I am interested in your opinion and suggestions for this and also for
the discussion re: scaling, consistency and dynamic behaviour.
Thanks,
Dave
|