Xymon Mailing List Archive search

strange graph behavior - random machines & graphs

list Gary Baluha
Mon, 7 Apr 2008 14:35:46 -0400
Message-Id: <user-fe840025b8ed@xymon.invalid>

In my case, it seems the "garbage" that is going into the graphs is caused
by a lack of data, rather than actual bad data.  I'm specifically wondering
if there's some time interval mix-up that is causing the issue.  If anyone
would like to see a current example of one of the graphs with bad data, I'll
gladly provide a screenshot.

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Hubbard, Greg L <user-d970b5e56ec9@xymon.invalid>
wrote:
 If you look through the source, the RRD support modules are easy to
spot.  If you are using custom graphs, then you need to review the ncv
method, or the "roll your own" method.

But, since "garbage in -> garbage out" you might be on the right path.

GLH

*From:* Gary Baluha [mailto:user-ae3e15c22de1@xymon.invalid]
*Sent:* Monday, April 07, 2008 1:15 PM
*To:* user-ae9b8668bcde@xymon.invalid
*Subject:* Re: [hobbit] strange graph behavior - random machines & graphs

I thought I'd revisit this issue again.  A new thought has occurred to
me...  Where does Hobbit generate the RRD files?  I wonder what parameters
Hobbit is using to pass to rrdtool, and if something there might be acting
funny with some of the data I'm providing to that Hobbit module.

On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:59 AM, Gary Baluha <user-ae3e15c22de1@xymon.invalid> wrote:
It's interesting that it seems the CPU Load and Users and Processes
graphs are the graphs that are most likely to have this strange corruption.
I have also seen it on a few Disk graphs, but not nearly as many as the
other two graphs.  Interestingly, the CPU Utilization, Network I/O, and TCP
Connection Times graphs have _never_ had this corruption.  I'd also like to
say the Memory Utilization graph hasn't had this issue either, though I
can't recall with complete certainty that that is the case.

I wonder what the main difference between the 3 graphs that do have the
issue is, and the 3 (possibly 4) graphs that have never exhibited this
issue.  There must be some physical difference, as I can't imagine it is all
due purely to luck...