[email protected] said: >> The server was alive and well during the whole time. Most of the >> time it was polling at 1024 seconds. > Since the new plot joins point 1024 or less seconds apart something else is > going on. Clearly most of your data is spread out by more than 1024 > seconds.
That was what I was trying to tell you a few days ago. There is a filter between the raw packets and peerstats. Only a few of the packets make it through. loopstats is only updated when peerstats for sys_peer gets updated. >> dig through the log files if it matters.) > Can you just send them to me? OK. Sent off list. > Well, it sure looks missing to me. Those are pretty sparse dots. The system was working as expected. > You can > adjust the 1024 to a value of your choosing. Just look in the plot_slice() > function. Can you suggest a value that looks good to you, without being > misleading? You can either make the 1024 in your test big enough to cover the normal case, or you can pick a number like an hour or two and live with the false positives. The last column in loopstats is the (log 2 of the) polling interval. You could multiply that by 8 on the fly. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
