Return-Path: william@bourbon.usc.edu Delivery-Date: Wed Sep 24 12:05:17 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on merlot.usc.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 Received: from bourbon.usc.edu (bourbon.usc.edu [128.125.9.75]) by merlot.usc.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m8OJ5HSb001829 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:05:17 -0700 Received: from bourbon.usc.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by bourbon.usc.edu (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m8OJ8CUU000577 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:08:12 -0700 Message-Id: <200809241908.m8OJ8CUU000577@bourbon.usc.edu> To: cs551@merlot.usc.edu Subject: Re: No of Customers Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:08:12 -0700 From: Bill Cheng Someone wrote: > In the spec it says the mu ,lambda, n ,etc arguments should be ignored > if -t is specified. So shouldnt we just use the number of customers > specified in the tracefile. You are absolutely correct. Please ignore my previoius e-mail! -- Bill Cheng // bill.cheng@usc.edu On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Bill Cheng wrote: > Someone wrote: > > > Should no of Customers from trace file be ignored if -n xyz > > is present in cmd line ? > > Hmm... The spec isn't clear about this. If both -n and -t are > specified, it's probably reasonable to use the minimum of what's > specified in -n and what's in the trace file. > -- > Bill Cheng // bill.cheng@usc.edu