Hi Paolo,
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Paolo Lucente wrote:
Good pointer. From a brief scan of the Aguri homepage, please feel free
to correct whether i'm wrong, i see many similarities between pmacct and
Aguri.
I guess so; I was thinking that Aguri seems to store its output in text
files rather
Hi Paolo,
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Paolo Lucente wrote:
minb = 1, zero_dstip, minb = 1, zero_dstport, minb = 1,
zero_srcport, minb = 1, zero_srcip
Then any flows which together do not add up to enough bytes to pass
the minb filters, even after aggregation, end up in a
On 06/13/2009 05:11:40 AM, Paolo Lucente wrote:
Hi Chris,
Aguri is slightly more limited in the fact it has only a set of
(4?) traffic aggregation profiles whereas pmacct offers a wider
range of primitives. But I guess the point you wanted to make was
the dynamic variation of the sampling
Hi Karl,
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 03:03:04PM -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
What really is the constrained resource here? Is it the number
of transactions the database supports or is it something more
fundamental to the pmacct performance like cpu or memory
constraints? What I'm thinking is
On 06/13/2009 03:49:07 PM, Paolo Lucente wrote:
Hi Chris,
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 03:07:01PM -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
We are only interested in a single table.
Why can't two separate sql plugins write to the same table?
What Karl is proposing here might really result in a simpler
