Eduardo M. Bragatto wrote: >I can have each server information store on a "server.rrd" file, like: > >server1.rrd, server2.rrd, etc... > >Or have it split among several rrd files for the same server, like: > >server1_cpu.rrd, server1_mem.rrd, server1_network.rrd, >server1_generic.rrd, server2_cpu.rrd, etc...
From a simple practicality perspective, the latter would be quite hard to maintain. Each time you add or delete a server you will have to redefine your rrd and change the collection routines to suit. Also, you cannot update DSs independently in one rrd. So as a minimum, you would probably be best keeping one rrd per server. Also, since the number of data volumes/partitions/filesystems is likely to vary between servers, I'd personally be inclined to have a separate rrd for each so that the rrds are of a standard format. If you are graphing multiple systems on one graph then I suspect there isn't too much difference in memory requirements between opening one big rrd and multiple smaller rrds with the same information. However, if you want to graph an individual system, then I find it hard to imagine opening/processing a big rrd (and using only part of it's data) to be more efficient than opening/processing a smaller one. _______________________________________________ rrd-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-users
