The cost of keeping evidence
Summaries require storage and calculation, and retained versions keep old data reachable. Sharing unchanged branches and compressing blocks make those costs manageable. In the paper’s production dataset, readings occupied 5.514 bytes each, including summary and historical overhead, compared with 16 bytes for a raw time-value pair.1 Compression depends on the data, and that measurement excludes replication. It is an observed result from the paper’s system, rather than a storage guarantee for every workload.
The limits of the example
The plant, grid, sensor and stored year are models. The diagram is not to scale. Its transmission line represents 100 km and its feeder 10 km. The feeder uses fixed impedances and solves one phase. The sensor illustrates quadrature demodulation with 16 samples per cycle; a real instrument samples faster and must meet specified accuracy requirements.1816 This page does not implement BTrDB’s standard-deviation summaries.23
These simplifications make the relationships inspectable. They do not establish the accuracy of a field instrument, reproduce an actual fault, or benchmark a production database.
What the archive makes possible
BTrDB’s design joins three needs. Time partitions give readings a stable address. Summaries let a search skip detail that cannot change its answer. Versions preserve earlier evidence and expose later changes.
Together these choices let an engineer move from a broad history to a brief event, examine the reported measurements, and recheck an analysis as the evidence evolves. Interpretation still depends on the sensor, the network model and the analysis. The database makes that work practical and traceable.18