Multiple RRD and STACK graph 🔗 link

Hi,

I have a custom graph definition that takes data (iops) from several RRD files (one file per disk).

Because those disks belong to a RAID array, I'd like to STACK their iops values on a single graph. To get an overview of iops over that RAID array.

I've tried using a single "STACK:rps at RRDIDX@" directive but I got the following error:
"STACK must follow LINE or AREA! command:"

So I used "LINE:rps at RRDIDX@#5C7CDA STACK:rps at RRDIDX@#5C7CDA:Read/sec" but this doesn't really stacks every disks value on top of each others.

I there a way to tell the graph definition to "stack on previous @RRDFN@" or some way to do the sum calculation on a set of @RRDFN@ at once (like CDEF:sum=rps at RRDIDX@,sum,+)? Or do I have to write a static graph definition using the X disk I want to sum up ?

TIA,
	Jo

On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 11:09 +0200, Joel Carnat wrote:

Hello,

I think you'll find that what it means is:

   LINE:rps at RRDIDX@#5C7CDA
   STACK:rps at RRDIDX@#5C7CDA:Read/sec

not that STACK must appear after LINE or AREA commands on the same line.


John.


-- 
John Horne                   Tel: +XX (X)XXXX XXXXXX
Plymouth University, UK      Fax: +XX (X)XXXX XXXXXX

Le 8 août 2012 à 11:49, John Horne a écrit :

Hum... maybe I was not clear in what I did.

At first, I only had the "STACK" line and got the "STACK must follow LINE or AREA" error.
So I inserted a "LINE" line before the "STACK". Then the error disappeared. But I did not use a single line for "LINE" and "STACK" in my graph definition. I have one definition per line ; as you wrote it. My mail was wrongly formatted.

In that last case, what doesn't suit my needs is that I get a graph with a bunch of LINE/STACK/LINE/STACK/LINE/STACK when what I'd like is a AREA/STACK/STACK/STACK/STACK.

Regards,
	Jo

On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 12:25 +0200, Joel Carnat wrote:

Does

  AREA:rps at RRDIDX@#5C7CDA:Read/sec:STACK


do what you want?

John.

-- 
John Horne                   Tel: +XX (X)XXXX XXXXXX
Plymouth University, UK      Fax: +XX (X)XXXX XXXXXX

Le 8 août 2012 à 13:02, John Horne a écrit :

YES! Thanks a lot.

	Jo.