There are, in fact, two different formulas for standard deviation here: The population standard deviation $\sigma$ and the sample standard deviation $s$.
If $x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_N$ denote all $N$ values from a population, then the (population) standard deviation is
$$\sigma = \sqrt{\frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N (x_i - \mu)^2},$$
where $\mu$ is the mean of the population.
If $x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_N$ denote $N$ values from a sample, however, then the (sample) standard deviation is
$$s = \sqrt{\frac{1}{N-1} \sum_{i=1}^N (x_i - \bar{x})^2},$$
where $\bar{x}$ is the mean of the sample.
The reason for the change in formula with the sample is this: When you're calculating $s$ you are normally using $s^2$ (the sample variance) to estimate $\sigma^2$ (the population variance). The problem, though, is that if you don't know $\sigma$ you generally don't know the population mean $\mu$, either, and so you have to use $\bar{x}$ in the place in the formula where you normally would use $\mu$. Doing so introduces a slight bias into the calculation: Since $\bar{x}$ is calculated from the sample, the values of $x_i$ are on average closer to $\bar{x}$ than they would be to $\mu$, and so the sum of squares $\sum_{i=1}^N (x_i - \bar{x})^2$ turns out to be smaller on average than $\sum_{i=1}^N (x_i - \mu)^2$. It just so happens that that bias can be corrected by dividing by $N-1$ instead of $N$. (Proving this is a standard exercise in an advanced undergraduate or beginning graduate course in statistical theory.) The technical term here is that $s^2$ (because of the division by $N-1$) is an unbiased estimator of $\sigma^2$.
Another way to think about it is that with a sample you have $N$ independent pieces of information. However, since $\bar{x}$ is the average of those $N$ pieces, if you know $x_1 - \bar{x}, x_2 - \bar{x}, \ldots, x_{N-1} - \bar{x}$, you can figure out what $x_N - \bar{x}$ is. So when you're squaring and adding up the residuals $x_i - \bar{x}$, there are really only $N-1$ independent pieces of information there. So in that sense perhaps dividing by $N-1$ rather than $N$ makes sense. The technical term here is that there are $N-1$ degrees of freedom in the residuals $x_i - \bar{x}$.
For more information, see Wikipedia's article on the sample standard deviation.
Posting as an answer in response to comments.
Here's a way to compute the mean and standard deviation in one pass over the file. (Pseudocode.)
n = r1 = r2 = 0;
while (more_samples()) {
s = next_sample();
n += 1;
r1 += s;
r2 += s*s;
}
mean = r1 / n;
stddev = sqrt(r2/n - (mean * mean));
Essentially, you keep a running total of the sum of the samples and the sum of their squares. This lets you easily compute the standard deviation at the end.
Best Answer
The seeking Mean and Standard Deviation are on a ratio, and we can't Mean all Ratio directly. So to calculate the Mean the only way is by summing Times and Sizes and to calculate the Ratio of these two values. And to calculate the
3σestimator of the Standard Deviation, the only ways is to use all calculated Ratios. I have no other way accomplished these two tasks.