Thanks Craig (I saw your response on the list, but not in my email, so I hope this goes in the right place ;-)
Yep, you are spot on.. 9TB! Just to make sure (and others can watch): root@xxxxx:~# snmpwalk -v1 -cxxxx 172.31.7.50 iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5 ... ... HOST-RESOURCES-MIB::hrStorageSize.2 = INTEGER: -1879278081 ... root@xxxxx:~# expr -1879278081 + 4294967296 2415689215 That is the value that I replaced (when adding the drive in JFFNMS) in the Size (Bytes) column. I tried to just insert it (after the graph had already been running for a few days), no joy. So I deleted the graph and re-discovered the drive, changed the value.. but nothing ever happens.. it just gives me the "-nan".. ;-( What am I doing wrong? On Thursday, March 20, 2014 9:48 AM, nairb rotsak <ipgur...@yahoo.com> wrote: I just had a customer of mine (running Ubuntu 10.04.4 32-bit) complain they were getting a very weird graph.. and that the disk was reporting -7697523019776 bytes. I manually did an snmpwalk.. and it reports that? I went over to my testing JFFNMS 0.9.4.. and I get the same thing. I have used snmp v2c (figured it was the 32 vs 64 bit counter thing). Same results. So I went onto the Google machine and started searching. Cacti.. Solarwinds.. seems like everyone has this problem and there are patches written to address this issue (which is apparently and snmp issue??). Is there anything we can do to get JFFNMS to recognize disks over 4TB? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech _______________________________________________ jffnms-users mailing list jffnms-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jffnms-users
