Tony Varriale wrote:
> Why I think it's wrong? Well...0,1,3,0 isn't even close to the actual
> "total drops" which is my goal. When set to GAUGE, it is close and I would
> be happy with that as long as I could take the difference between the
> current value and the previous and graph the differe
Tony Varriale wrote:
>Sorry, I replied to Simon directly...
>
>> OK, try giving us an example of :
>> what you put in
>> what you expect to come out
>> what you actually get out
>> and if the latter two are different, why you think it's wrong !
>
>Ok. I am trying to gather and graph dropped
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 04:56:23PM -0600, Tony Varriale wrote:
> If you aren't willing to assist me, then why be condescending? Why not just
> either be helpful or not post? I didn't come here to have people make bad
> assumptions and be treated like a jag. I came here because I felt that I'v
> Yeah. Except that this is oversimplified. Really, you can find more
> information on normalization and consolidation on my site.
I read that. I've read a bunch of stuff.
> Stop thinking "n drops". Start thinking "n drops per second".
I am.
> Everything (!!!) is a rate in rrdtool, and I do
Sorry, I replied to Simon directly...
> OK, try giving us an example of :
> what you put in
> what you expect to come out
> what you actually get out
> and if the latter two are different, why you think it's wrong !
Ok. I am trying to gather and graph dropped packets in a qos queue on
multiple c
..that is
what I get. It's really close and I would be fine with that. The problem
is that the graph continues to keep going up.
tv
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Hobson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 12:35 PM
Subject: [rrd-users] R
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:10:41PM -0600, Tony Varriale wrote:
> > GAUGE is _not_ a value, it is a rate. And it is subject to
> > any normalization and consolidation like any other rate.
>
> Well...I'm really confused. Here is what it's states from the beginner's
> guide:
> "GAUGE does not s
Tony Varriale wrote:
>Ok...well...DERIVE doesn't give me accurate numbers. Not even close. That
>is why I am trying to ask the community for a solution to the problem.
OK, try giving us an example of :
what you put in
what you expect to come out
what you actually get out
and if the latter two a
Tony Varriale wrote:
> > Closer, but it uses the values supplied AND THE TIME INTERVALS to
>> work out the rate over each interval defined in your rrd. If your
>> updates EXACTLY match the time intervals then the rate stored will
>> match the value you put in, otherwise it will be adjusted.
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 2:45 PM
Subject: [rrd-users] Re: Manipulating and Graphing Data
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 10:42:15AM -0600, Tony Varriale wrote:
>> > Closer, but it uses the values supplied AND THE TIME INTERVALS to
>> > work out the
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 10:42:15AM -0600, Tony Varriale wrote:
> > Closer, but it uses the values supplied AND THE TIME INTERVALS to
> > work out the rate over each interval defined in your rrd. If your
> > updates EXACTLY match the time intervals then the rate stored will
> > match the value you p
> Closer, but it uses the values supplied AND THE TIME INTERVALS to
> work out the rate over each interval defined in your rrd. If your
> updates EXACTLY match the time intervals then the rate stored will
> match the value you put in, otherwise it will be adjusted.
Right, which is why when I use G
Tony Varriale wrote:
>Hi...thanks for the info. I did try DERIVE but I get very inaccurate results.
>
>For example:
>I had about 400 drops in the queue that were generated. The graphs
>and data were showing anywhere from 8-16 drops. I again verified
>the actual data with a manual snmpwalk.
>
Is this not
true?
Thanks!
tv
- Original Message -
From: "Alex van den Bogaerdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 6:08 PM
Subject: [rrd-users] Re: Manipulating and Graphing Data
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 05:45:44PM -0600, Tony Varriale wrote:
&g
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 05:45:44PM -0600, Tony Varriale wrote:
> I am currently polling a qos drop queue and it returns the correct value.
> The values are getting stored correct and everything looks great.
No, they ("the values") are not stored.
This wrong assumption is probably the foundation
15 matches
Mail list logo
