Steven Hartland wrote: >Is there a stacked area's limit? I've got a graph with a >large number of sources ~200 and my code which works just >fine for smaller numbers starts to go all weird on me >with this number of sources / stacks. > >The result being I loose all negative data ( the second >~100 set of stacks ) and 95% totals go nan.
I have an application that graphs a stack of 254 positive plus a stack of 254 negative values (traffic by IP address). As long as it works then it works no differently to the same graphs using a dozen values - it's slow as it needs nearly 2G of memory and sometimes the system runs out of swap space. I didn't realise I'd need so much when I build the system and allowed 1G swap on a system with 256M ram - since upgraded to 1G ram. Interestingly, I've noticed that the same graph needs increasing amount of memory as you go back in time - ie using coarser consolidations. Simon -- Unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Help mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/rrd-users WebAdmin http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/lsg2.cgi
