On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 10:55:21AM +0200, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote: > George Dau wrote: > > Just fake the timestamp so it looks like it runs exactly on the 5 minute > > boudary. Instead of using: > > Process the following events using that method: > (don't say this is unrealistic, it is just an exaggerated example) > > 12:00:00 there are 20 lines in use > 12:00:10 you monitor > 12:00:30 incoming call > 12:01:00 incoming call > 12:01:30 incoming call > 12:02:00 incoming call > 12:02:30 incoming call > 12:03:00 incoming call > 12:03:30 incoming call > 12:04:00 incoming call > 12:04:30 incoming call > 12:05:00 10 lines are disconnected > 12:05:10 you monitor > > What numbers do you get? 20 at 12:00:10 and 19 at 12:05:10. > You enter this as 20 at 12:00 and 19 at 12:05. > > What is the real maximum? 29, not 20.
However, this won't be affected in any way by quantizing the time stamps. With RRD's usual rules, for the 12:00-12:05 interval the maximum would be entered as an average of 20 and 19: ((10sec*20)+(590sec*19))/600sec, or something like that. In either case, the precision is quite high, but the accuracy (as a reflection of the real events) is very poor. I don't see that quantizing the time intervals (to force quantization of the reported values) hurts in this case. -- Clifton -- Clifton Royston -- LavaNet Systems Architect -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWJD? "JWRTFM!" - Scott Dorsey (kludge) "JWG" - Eddie Aikau -- Unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Help mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/rrd-users WebAdmin http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/lsg2.cgi
