[mrtg] Re: Inaccurate Results

Jeroen Geusebroek Jeroen.Geusebroek at intercept.cx
Thu Jul 6 20:06:27 MEST 2000


>Hi, what about loading SNMP on the servers themselves and monitoring that?
>In my experience with MRTG it has been highly accurate - yes it does have a
>data averaging algorithm, but if your FTP transfer started before the time
>interval and ended after it, the single pixel update should have been

SNMP is loaded on the servers themselves, and i am monitoring that. I just
saw something that was accurate (finaly) but that was only on one interface
(The interface to my cablemodem). But the internal network still isn't

>Perhaps monitoring the network interface on the server won't be a bad idea
>if only for test purposes.  I did that on an NT machine and the results I
>got were spot on (did a continuous ping with high data volumes over a LAN
>simulate regular throughput and it graphed correctly...however I did run it
>for a while longer than that, perhaps 30 minutes or so)

>As you can see from the numerous responses, most people who know MRTG rely
>on it quite heavily and have a lot of faith in it's data from experience :)

That makes me think more and more i'm doing something wrong :) Could it be
my MaxBytes setting? I'm using 1250000 for my 10Mb card to the internal net,
12500000 for the 100Mb card to the internal net and 304878 to my 10M card
that is connected to my cablemodem (300KB/s max)



Unsubscribe mailto:mrtg-request at list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=unsubscribe
Archive     http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/mrtg
FAQ         http://faq.mrtg.org    Homepage     http://www.mrtg.org
WebAdmin    http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/lsg2.cgi

More information about the mrtg mailing list