[rrd-users] How are --start and --end supposed to behave?

This is a discussion on [rrd-users] How are --start and --end supposed to behave? within the RRD Users forums, part of the Networking and Network Related category; Hi there, Suppose I have an rrd file with step=300 and good data every 5 minutes. I want "...


Go Back   Usenet Forums > Networking and Network Related > RRD Users

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2007
Peter Valdemar Mørch
 
Posts: n/a
Default [rrd-users] How are --start and --end supposed to behave?

Hi there,

Suppose I have an rrd file with step=300 and good data every 5 minutes.

I want "values from the N last samples". What are the right values for
--start and --end in fetch, graph or xport?

If the time is now 15:08, the last good sample is from
15:00-15:05. So far so good.

Now, the behaviour of rrdtool differs depending on the version
we're using.

In rrdtool version 1.2.11 "-start 15:00 -end 15:00" gives zero
returned rows. Both "--start 15:00 --end 15:05" and "--start
15:00 --end 15:00+1" give one row with a time stamp of
1169388300 which is unixtime for 15:05.

In rrdtool version 1.2.15 both "-start 15:00 -end 15:00" and
"--start 15:00 --end 15:00+1" give one row with a time stamp of
1169388300 which is unixtime for 15:05, while "--start 15:00
--end 15:05" gives two rows, with time stamps 1169388300 and
1169388600: 15:05 and 15:10 (that last one being NaN since the
time is only 15:08)

Because of this, we've started using the "15:00+1" to get around the
version dependency so that 1.2.11 and 1.2.15 behave the same.

I don't see this behavioral change mentioned in the release
announcements for 1.2.12 and 1.2.15 (what happened to .13 and .14?) and
so I wonder if this is intentional. It "looks like" a < changed to <= or
something.

Also, I don't see either behaviour documented anywhere. The closest is
man rrdfetch, but it doesn't mention how many and what rows to expect
back given a certain resolution. I'm also assuming that a row with a
timestamp of t represents the time from t-step to t.

Is this "+1" solution going to work "forever" or are there more changes
to come? Is there a better way to figure out --start and --end to "get
the last N samples"?

--
Peter Valdemar Mørch
http://www.morch.com

--
Unsubscribe mailto:rrd-users-request@list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=unsubscribe
Help mailto:rrd-users-request@list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=help
Archive http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/rrd-users
WebAdmin http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/lsg2.cgi

Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0