> both cases only a fraction more than half the actual loss. If > this is indeed the case it should be mostly remedied by > making the script run a minute later, or is there a better > way to accomplish this?
In perl I'd do something like: $timestamp = $step * int($timestamp/$size) You are using a shell script, so you'll have to call some external program like bc, dc or awk. > Hmmm, This is logical for the graph itsself, but IMHO > shouldn't be for raw MAX and MIN calculations as in GPRINT's. > A Maximum is a maximum and by definition shouldn't be > averaged if it doesn't have to be for viewing purposes. But a GPRINT is for viewing purposes. Afaik, a GPRINT is not raw, but just as averaged as your graph is. > BTW, am I correct in assuming that the only reason to add > more RRA's with a bigger step are to minimise CPU-time at > graph generation time, or am I missing something obvious here? Almost, it also saves disk space. Serge. ------------- Op de inhoud van dit e-mailbericht en de daaraan gehechte bijlagen is de inhoud van de volgende disclaimer van toepassing: http://www.zeelandnet.nl/disclaimer.php -- 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
