On the contrary, in combination w/ avg reads, avg writes, and avg CPU this information can tell a very good story. The point being that ClearTrace like any commercial product has limitations. JacekO was kind enough to share some alternatives w/ the rest of the SQL Server community.
Avg read, write and CPU is such a liner read in the world of performance issues. Unless you are in a fantasy world, it tells you no stories. You can have low avg CPU, reads and writes but have an incredible performance bottleneck that is CXPACKET signal or PAGEIOLATCH_XX induced. Either none of these readings will catch it or catch a false positive. We can take this topic offline if you want to.
The point being ... the article title and build up is misleading. Its offers up very little about performance, not to mention the computation is psuedo-dynamic (or as dynamic as the traces)
Thanks for stepping in in defence of the article. I am very pleased someone found it useful.
Fortunately this is an open forum so everyone can express their opinions. It happens that some of the members will have a disagreement over some topics. I participated in some heated discussions here myself as well and observed other topics when the discussion went nasty. Unfortunately when someone's mind is made - it is very hard to 'unmake' it, sometimes it is just better to drop the subject...
Jacek, Giving you a hard time was not my intention. When you post an article with a title "Using Server Side Traces for Dynamic Performance Evaluation" but offer up very little in the world of performance evaluation; you got to expect challenges. Sorry you feel chastised ...