[rrd-users] Re: Strange rrdtool behaviour (IMHO)
serge.maandag at staff.zeelandnet.nl
Sun Jan 9 17:47:51 MET 2005
> both cases only a fraction more than half the actual loss. If
> this is indeed the case it should be mostly remedied by
> making the script run a minute later, or is there a better
> way to accomplish this?
In perl I'd do something like:
$timestamp = $step * int($timestamp/$size)
You are using a shell script, so you'll have to call some
external program like bc, dc or awk.
> Hmmm, This is logical for the graph itsself, but IMHO
> shouldn't be for raw MAX and MIN calculations as in GPRINT's.
> A Maximum is a maximum and by definition shouldn't be
> averaged if it doesn't have to be for viewing purposes.
But a GPRINT is for viewing purposes. Afaik, a GPRINT is not raw,
but just as averaged as your graph is.
> BTW, am I correct in assuming that the only reason to add
> more RRA's with a bigger step are to minimise CPU-time at
> graph generation time, or am I missing something obvious here?
Almost, it also saves disk space.
Op de inhoud van dit e-mailbericht en de daaraan gehechte bijlagen is de inhoud van de volgende disclaimer van toepassing: http://www.zeelandnet.nl/disclaimer.php
Unsubscribe mailto:rrd-users-request at list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=unsubscribe
Help mailto:rrd-users-request at list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=help
More information about the rrd-users