Hi Paolo, Paolo Lucente, 03.05.2006 11:55: > Actually, the memory table gets locked only to avoid inconsistencies, ie. > to serve the '-r' reset flag. What about adding to the client program an > explicit (say, '-l') lock request flag ? Ie. queries are async by default; > but they can be serviced syncronously on-request.
Is there a case, when using the -r flag, where you don't want locking? Or do you mean, that -l could be useful in case of not using -r? BTW.: does the following error message refer to that locking?: May 3 15:06:02 sniff pmacctd[16441]: ERROR ( dport/memory ): We are missing data. What should be noted in the docs at least is, that * refers to the sum of all traffic without the -r, and the rest of traffic with the -r flag, as a consequence of the stepwise resetting of the counters. Don't you think so? Cheers, Sven -- Sven Anderson Institute for Informatics - http://www.ifi.informatik.uni-goettingen.de Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen Lotzestr. 16-18, 37083 Goettingen, Germany _______________________________________________ pmacct-discussion mailing list http://www.pmacct.net/#mailinglists
