Hi Jérôme, On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 07:29:23PM +0200, Jerome Renard wrote: > I tested the "cache_result" type, and when the DERIVE type is used, I > do not get the correct numbers.
> If I compare the output I get from varnishstat and the result I get > from the rrd generated graphs the values are completely different. as far as I see, varnishstat divides counter values with the uptime. The result is therefore roughly the all-time average rate of that counter. With collectd, you get the rate of the last $Interval seconds, for example the last 10 seconds in the default configuration. This value may of course be *much* smaller or larger, depending on how busy the system was compared to the average usage. > I guess this is due to de derive type. "COUNTER" and "DERIVE" only differ in the overflow and counter-reset cases. Since overflows are next to impossible with 64bit counters, and because the counters are reset to zero when varnish is restarted, I opted for optimizing for the latter case, i.e. used "DERIVE". You can find a more in-depth explanation of the difference between "COUNTER" and "DERIVE" in the collectd wiki at [0]. > But the problem is that I never get any value, it is always set to > zero, here is what I get from the debug: Is the counter value actually increasing? Otherwise a rate of (close to) zero is expected and normal. Regards, -octo [0] <http://collectd.org/wiki/index.php/Data_source> -- Florian octo Forster Hacker in training GnuPG: 0x91523C3D http://verplant.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ collectd mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.verplant.org/listinfo/collectd
