[hobbit] strange graph behavior - random machines & graphs

[Gary Baluha]

Oh, and I'm using the NCV module.

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Gary Baluha <gumby3203 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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 <greg.hubbard at eds.com>
> 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:gumby3203 at gmail.com]
> > *Sent:* Monday, April 07, 2008 1:15 PM
> > *To:* hobbit at hswn.dk
> > *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 <gumby3203 at gmail.com>
> > 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...
> > >
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.xymon.com/pipermail/xymon/attachments/20080407/7e14b024/attachment.html>