On Tue, 2017-04-25 at 17:22 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > What's your use case for sensord without RRD? Logging values and alarms > into syslog?
Yes, when a machine powers off overnight, having that info in syslog helps diagnose what happened. > In that case we might just want to remove/disable RRD support while > keeping the rest of the features. I think it would be better to keep it if possible. > This is true, that said while lm-sensors is dead for a bit less than 2 > years now, there hasn't been any change to sensord for more than 5 > years, and no major change for more than 8 years. I guess it does what is needed with no major changes? > Hmm, it only works for one change, after that the .old file will be > overwritten causing the data loss. I guess the filename should include > the date and time. Yes, I didn't implement this because my C skills are rusty. Also, the time between events should be long so the admin should notice the log error before the old file is overwritten and RRD rotates out old data anyway AFAIK. Also the old file will be in backups. > While that might work (provided we keep multiple versions of the file), > I think the data are not really usable as each period will have a > different format. The real way to fix that would be to use one RRD file > per sensor, but it becomes a major change to the software, and I am not > sure we want to do that given the dead upstream I don't intend to work on multiple files as my C skills are rusty. Agreed that fixing this properly can wait until upstream returns. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
