Today Hans-Peter Werner wrote: > xml as intermediate-format is what i was thinking of at first. but it has a > severe drawback. xml-files are getting really big with some rrds (in our > case about 50MB), so processing those files is very time- and > memory-consuming. > i think that 'add' and 'delete' would be easy to implement, as well as > joining rrds, having the same RRAs and step. > but i dont see the need for this, since you can generate graphs from > multiple rrds. so, in my opinion, a single rrd for each ds is all you need. > but i'm not using all features of rrdtool, especially CDEF, so maybe i miss > the point.
Hi Hp, if performance is of no concern to you, using one RRD per DS is the right thing todo ... if performance is an issue you want to add several DS to one RRD especially if you tend to use them as a group all the time anyway ... cheers tobi -- ______ __ _ /_ __/_ / / (_) Oetiker @ ISG.EE, ETZ J97, ETH, CH-8092 Zurich / // _ \/ _ \/ / System Manager, Time Lord, Coder, Designer, Coach /_/ \.__/_.__/_/ http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~oetiker +41(0)1-632-5286 -- Unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Help mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/rrd-developers WebAdmin http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/lsg2.cgi
