Skip to content

[Docs] clarification about cardinality accuracy #34616

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 22, 2018
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -150,10 +150,18 @@ public static void main(String[] args) {

image:images/cardinality_error.png[]

For all 3 thresholds, counts have been accurate up to the configured threshold
(although not guaranteed, this is likely to be the case). Please also note that
even with a threshold as low as 100, the error remains very low, even when
counting millions of items.
For all 3 thresholds, counts have been accurate up to the configured threshold.
Although not guaranteed, this is likely to be the case. Accuracy in practice depends
on the dataset in question. In general, most datasets show consistently good
accuracy. Also note that even with a threshold as low as 100, the error
remains very low (1-6% as seen in the above graph) even when counting millions of items.

The HyperLogLog++ algorithm depends on the leading zeros of hashed
values, the exact distributions of hashes in a dataset can affect the
accuracy of the cardinality.

Please also note that even with a threshold as low as 100, the error remains
very low, even when counting millions of items.

==== Pre-computed hashes

Expand Down