On Fri 19 May 2006 15:18, Paolo Lucente wrote: > Hi Peter, > > On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:38:37PM +0300, Peter Nixon wrote: > > The only question that remains, is how to handle bytes? Ideally I think > > the schema should be changed/extended to have an bytesin and bytesout > > column.. What do you think? > > I think that while it would be the best ever solution (with no doubts), it > will also break many things. And backward compatibility is great priority. > The actually viable but intuitively less economical solution is to mantain > the 2 tuples segregated, by assigning them different tags. This should at > least ease the job of getting out in/out/total traffic and definitely avoid > the ugly JOINs.
So do you mean having the existing "bytes" column stay which in the case where you have a reversed module it would be the sum of both in and out, as well as adding a "bytesin" and "bytesout"?? Or did I not understand correctly what you meant? -- Peter Nixon http://www.peternixon.net/ PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc
pgp8Ji57Tbely.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ pmacct-discussion mailing list http://www.pmacct.net/#mailinglists
