Tobias Oetiker tobi-at-oetiker.ch |Lists| wrote: >> Returning a row after $end_time is a new issue and should probably be >> seen as a bug. > > note that the design goal of fetch is to return enough data to > 'covert' at least the interval covered with start-end, if a little > more data is returned there is no harm done ...
Of course, compared to the rest of life, there is no harm done whatever happens with --start and --end! :D Tobi, it seems you disagree with Alex that the current behaviour is buggy. If the two of you disagree, well no wonder I'm confused! If there is some reason I don't understand that you'd like the freedom to change this behaviour, and therefore would prefer to leave it undocumented? I don't mind submitting a .pod patch e.g. to doc/rrdfetch.pod documenting the current behaviour, if that is what we should stick with. Something along the lines of Alex's examples. For my script to break for unpredictable and undocumented reasons - well that *is* some small harm to me, because my script needs the data from exactly the N last good samples, not N-1 or N+1. And until I discovered the '+1' trick I didn't know how to do that. Would such a documentation patch be considered? Peter -- Peter Valdemar Mørch http://www.morch.com -- Unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Help mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/rrd-users WebAdmin http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/lsg2.cgi
