Yep, the problem is really in how the RRD is set up. I have some custom
scripts that simply "wc -l" some files and these go into an RRD as a
gauge...I thought this function might let me get out from under all the
custom moving parts, but no luck in this release.
But I also use "DERIVED" counts to see what my incoming syslog and trap
rates are -- so the linecount function could replace these custom
scripts, except that the way I have it now these items get their own
status dot and a nicely labeled graph. The new linecount graphs are
buried in the "trends" stack so you have to know to go look for them
there.
Lest I sound too much like a whiner -- I really like where Henrik is
taking us all with each new Hobbit release!
GLH
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard.Hall [mailto:user-3ebc6586540e@xymon.invalid] Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 12:22 PM
To: user-ae9b8668bcde@xymon.invalid
Subject: Re: [hobbit] More about linecount
Replying to myself ...
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Richard.Hall wrote:
Greg,
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Hubbard, Greg L wrote:
Well, now I know how linecount works. I was hoping that it would > let me track the number of lines in a file and spot changes over > time. But this is not what line count is for -- it is intended to > match some arbitrary subset of lines in a file, and then this is > tracked via RRD as a "derived" value, meaning what is graphed is how
the count changes over time, scaled into units per second. This is > perfect if you want to watch the rate of login failures on your > system, but not very useful for what I wanted.
So I will monitor changes in file size (which might show me > changes), but cannot readily translate this into a line count.
So, an enhancement request -- add a "line count" as a file > parameter, in addition to all the normal things that are available
now?
If I'm remembering correctly what Henrik said about how linecount works (sorry, didn't keep the message), can't you do something like
totallines:.*
to make the pattern match every line of the file?
Doh! Obviously not - you want the total, not the rate of change.
Apologies for the noise.
Richard