[rrd-users] Re: Strange rrdtool behaviour (IMHO)

Serge Maandag 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
Archive     http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/rrd-users
WebAdmin    http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/lsg2.cgi

More information about the rrd-users mailing list