In this instance we have Observium/rrdtool configured to keep 730 days of 5 minute samples so the data is there until we get beyond a couple of years. Guess we will need to export the data and run the analysis elsewhere.
> On Oct 6, 2022, at 11:55, Adam Armstrong via observium > <[email protected]> wrote: > > This also would be inaccurate. > > The method we use generates an accurate figure for graphs using 5 min > samples, beyond that it’s not possible. > > If one port does 999mb at the start of a 30 min period and another does 999mb > 25 mins later, we’d generate an aggregate max of 1998mb n any graph with > these two ports and once they are averaged to 30min samples, which is > obviously useless :) > > There’s no actual solution to this, the data simply no longer exists at this > point. We should /probably/ hide the aggregate max on graphs > 24hr > > Adam. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 6 Oct 2022, at 03:57, David Milton via observium >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Thanks for the explanation. To my mind however, the aggregate max would be >> to take the sum of all values of the same time and select the maximum sum. >> Using an average for a maximum when all other values are discrete produces >> results that aren’t useful. >> I know it’s not Observium but that’s a major problem with rrdtool in my >> opinion >> >>> On Wed, 5 Oct 2022, at 13:08, Adam Armstrong via observium wrote: >>> Hi David, >>> >>> This is due to how rrdtool works. It doesn't make a lot of sense to >>> aggregate the max of max together, so the max for the aggregate is the >>> max of the aggregated averages, rather than the max of the max values, >>> which wouldn't make a lot of senses since it'd be merging peaks which >>> may not have actually occurred at the same time. >>> >>> adam. >>> >>> David Milton via observium wrote on 05/10/2022 17:55: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> We have been seeing some results in our stacked graphs that do not appear >>>> to make sense. >>>> Initially we thought this was because the maximum values for the two >>>> values occurred at different points in time. >>>> That cannot be the whole issue because even if you take the sum of every >>>> pair of numbers the maximum aggregate must at least equal the maximum >>>> value of one of the two series. >>>> >>>> This graph shows the problem: >>>> >>>> How can we have a maximum value of 97.4M but an aggregate maximum of >>>> 55.7M? It seems that maximum aggregate should also at least be 97.4M. >>>> >>>> What’s happening here? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Dave. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> observium mailing list -- [email protected] >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from Postbox >>> <https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> observium mailing list -- [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> >> -- >> David Milton >> [email protected], >> For better email, sign up here: http://www.fastmail.fm/?STKI=7947829 >> _______________________________________________ >> observium mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > observium mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ observium mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
