# Updates on Test Data

**URL:** <https://forum.storj.io/t/updates-on-test-data/26034>\
**Category:** Announcements\
**Created:** [April 30, 2024, 3:36pm UTC](https://forum.storj.io/t/updates-on-test-data/26034 "2024-04-30T15:36:45Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 1346

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Arkina](https://storj.bcdn.literatehosting.com/user_avatar/forum.storj.io/arkina/32/6137_2.png) [@Arkina](https://forum.storj.io/u/Arkina)\
**Post date:** [June 17, 2024, 11:17am UTC](https://forum.storj.io/t/updates-on-test-data/26034/1346 "2024-06-17T11:17:16Z")

</div>

> [@Roxor](#):
>
> I’m getting confused as to what I’m seeing now 🙂

Within that graph following two values (over ALL satellites) are compared:

max(storj\_stats\_storage\_free\_capacity\_estimate\_bytes) - green

> statistical estimate of free storage node capacity, with suspicious values removed

sum(storj\_stats\_storage\_remote\_bytes) - blue

> number of bytes stored on storage nodes (does not take into account the expansion factor of erasure encoding)

Because the expansion factor is not taken into account i called that value stored customer data. Of course its a bit comparing Apples to Eggs, but thats the nearest i could get to, without modifying (and thus possibly falsifying) the reported data.

> [@Roxor](#):
>
> SNOs deal in expanded/actually-used space. And it sounds like satellites can now handle multiple different expansion factors at once. So any report with un-expanded/variable-expansion-factor numbers isn’t showing useful data because you don’t know how much space expanded customer data will take?

Yes you are right, so it is important to understand the Values you are looking at. In my opinion it is still useful data because i, as an SNO, am interested to see if/how the network is utilised, which is reflected by those numbers.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.storj.io/t/updates-on-test-data/26034)._