[mb-users] bad puid

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2006/10/6, Steve Wyles <steve at inhouse.co.uk>:
>
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>
>
> > I suppose they are growing, but slowly or fast?
>
> Due to the work of Jan and a couple of other people that use those
> reports, the raw DuplicatePUIDsPerAlbum report file is actually a fair bit
> smaller now than when I started running it. The others have slightly
> increased in size, but that is not unexpected.
>
> DuplicatePUIDsPerAlbum
>
> Date    Bytes
> 09-14   683479
> 10-06   475610
>
> TracksWithManyPUIDs
>
> 09-14   57441
> 10-06   63408
>
> PUIDsWithManyTracks
>
> 09-14   2988285
> 10-06   3036319
>
> Sorry, I haven't got a record prior to 14th September, as I've removed the
> report cron job emails from my mailbox.
>
> Steve
>

Don't be sorry, I just wanted to have an idea how things were evolving and
at what rate. Much better than I feared. Still, I think the little
improvement I suggested in Picard (if technically feasible) could help slow
bad PUIDs a little, don't you agree?

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-users/attachments/20061006/59ed0ac8/attachment.htm