On 2017-04-26 09:38:09 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-04-25 at 17:22 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Hmm, it only works for one change, after that the .old file will be
> > overwritten causing the data loss. I guess the filename should include
> > the date and time.
Or an index that
On Tue, 2017-04-25 at 17:22 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> What's your use case for sensord without RRD? Logging values and alarms
> into syslog?
Yes, when a machine powers off overnight, having that info in syslog
helps diagnose what happened.
> In that case we might just want to
On 2017-04-25 17:22:37 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> While that might work (provided we keep multiple versions of the file),
> I think the data are not really usable as each period will have a
> different format. The real way to fix that would be to use one RRD file
> per sensor, but it becomes a
On 2017-04-12 12:24, Paul Wise wrote:
> This was an unfortunate outcome for those of us who use sensord but do
> not use the RRD mode at all. I think it would have been better to just
> disable the RRD mode, but that wouldn't have been the right solution.
What's your use case for sensord without
On Wed, 2017-04-12 at 10:31 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> I've attached a patch which renames the old RRD file
> and creates a new one. Could we add it and restore sensord?
Attached a better version of the patch with two fixes:
* No memory leak
* Updates the new RRD after creation
--
bye,
pabs
Control: tags -1 + patch
On Wed, 2017-04-12 at 08:42 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> I'm going to try to write a patch to achieve this now.
I've attached a patch which renames the old RRD file
and creates a new one. Could we add it and restore sensord?
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
On Wed, 05 Apr 2017 12:09:00 + Niels Thykier wrote:
> Sounds like we should just sensord now while it still "sort of works"
> rather than dragging on with it until it breaks irrevocably.
This was an unfortunate outcome for those of us who use sensord but do
not use the RRD mode at all. I
On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 23:30:26 +0200 Aurelien Jarno
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2015-07-01 21:08, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Package: sensord
> > Version: 1:3.3.5-2
> > Severity: grave
> > Justification: causes non-serious data loss
> >
> > It seems that sensord uses an inconsistent
On 2015-08-09 00:21, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Hi,
On 2015-08-08 23:30:26 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
From what I have been able to get the problem is that when using a
single rrd file for all data, the number of columns (ie sensors) is
defined when the file is created. Therefore the
Hi,
On 2015-07-01 21:08, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Package: sensord
Version: 1:3.3.5-2
Severity: grave
Justification: causes non-serious data loss
It seems that sensord uses an inconsistent set of data for its
RRD update, yielding data loss. rrd update no longer updates
the sensord.rrd
Hi,
On 2015-08-08 23:30:26 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
From what I have been able to get the problem is that when using a
single rrd file for all data, the number of columns (ie sensors) is
defined when the file is created. Therefore the upgrade of your kernel
changed the number of sensors,
On 2015-07-01 21:08:19 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
It seems that sensord uses an inconsistent set of data for its
RRD update, yielding data loss. rrd update no longer updates
the sensord.rrd database:
[...]
This has happened again on a different machine. The update of
the RRD database
It seems to be a bug similar to bug 614965.
--
Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: https://www.vinc17.net/
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: https://www.vinc17.net/blog/
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Package: sensord
Version: 1:3.3.5-2
Severity: grave
Justification: causes non-serious data loss
It seems that sensord uses an inconsistent set of data for its
RRD update, yielding data loss. rrd update no longer updates
the sensord.rrd database:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 82480 2015-05-13 00:25:00
14 matches
Mail list logo