Hi Adam, If you check the list archives, you'll see that the discussion of NANs has been thoroughly covered in the past month.
(Though, I'll confess that I don't recall anyone declaring that "val+NAN" is more meaningful than "NAN+NAN.") Regards, /andy Adam Jacob Muller wrote: > Hello, > I have an application utilizing rrdtool where it is in some cases > useful to produce "aggregate" graphs of information, this works great > in rrdtool by just doing a CDEF=somefield_aggregate=field1,field2,+ > > the only problem I experience here is when field1 or field2 are NAN, > obviously when field1 and field2 are NAN the proper result is NAN, but > if field1 is NAN and field2 is some positive value than the result > should be field2's value. > > Right now I am solving this by doing something like: > > CDEF:field1_nz=%s,UN,0,field1,IF > CDEF:field2_nz=%s,UN,0,field2,IF > CDEF:field_total=field1_nz,field2_nz,+ > > this works, but, on values where both are NAN this returns 0, it would > be much more preferable to return NAN here > > Any ideas how to do this. > > > -Adam > > _______________________________________________ > rrd-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-users > -- Andy Riebs, HP High Performance Computing R&D Technology for better business outcomes Linux Software, <http://www.hp.com/go/clusters> Catalyst Program, <http://www.hp.com/go/catalysts> My opinions are not necessarily those of HP (w) +1.603.884.1521, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (h) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Data are not is.) _______________________________________________ rrd-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-users
