[rrd-users] Re: --width affects results?

ralf-buero at kruedewagen.de ralf-buero at kruedewagen.de
Tue Oct 4 10:20:11 MEST 2005

On Tuesday 04 October 2005 01:26, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 07:17:00PM -0400, Gregory (Grisha) 
Trubetskoy wrote:
> > Note that the only thing different above is --width. Is this a
> > feature or a bug? :-) Sorry, I didn't have time to research this
> > further, just thought someone on the list might know right away.
> Different graph size results in different consolidation
> Different amount of NaN (unknowns) may be present
> Start and/or end times will be different due to consolidation
> I'm sure a thourough analysis would explain the differences.
> For research, see footer.

Yes, this is what I have already assumed during my studies. Even if 
you use GPRINT, the results are also different depending on image 
size. The results differ for me much more than in Grishas example 
(for instance 98.1 vs. 96.0).

The big problem is: How can I calculate a mathematically correct 
average now based on all measurements between start and end time ? 
Nobody (if not knowing the details of RRDtool) will trust me, if I 
say, that averages (numbers) depend on the size of the image. The 
size of the image should IMHO not affect numbers calculated and 
printed by GPRINT or PRINT.


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://lists.ee.ethz.ch/rrd-users
WebAdmin    http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/lsg2.cgi

More information about the rrd-users mailing list