On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 02:27:34PM -1000, Clifton Royston wrote: > However, I hope you realize what you are getting via your proposal is > *not* flawed data, it's no data at all - you're only making it look as > though you had data. In some sense, it's "negative" data - you are > removing the data indicating that you were unable to collect data > values at a certain time, which could be useful data in itself.
Agreed entirely. > As you can tell, I'm philosophically opposed to this. As am I. There was a very specific and somewhat broken situation which required this, unfortunately. I definitely don't want to come across as saying it's a good thing, or encouraging its widespread usage. > If you only want smooth looking *graphs*, there's probably a way to > do this with some of the CDEF expressions in the grapher, using the > "PREV" command. E.g. assuming orig is the def for your original data > source, something like: > > CDEF:smooth=orig,UN,PREV,orig,IF > > should give you a graph with flat-lines where the data is unknown, much > like MRTG's old behavior. Yup, that works; thanks. What I'd really like though is a script to perform the necessary fondlage on the RRD itself -- or more realistically, export the RRD to XML, perform the necessary fondlage there, and then re-build the RRD. Has anyone done this before? Cheers, -adam -- 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
