Graph problem after upgrade

Post general support questions here that do not specifically fall into the Linux or Windows categories.

Moderators: Developers, Moderators

Post Reply
mz
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:53 am

Graph problem after upgrade

Post by mz »

Hi,
I've upgraded Cacti from 0.8.7a to 0.8.7e. After the transition all my 'Interface - Traffic (bits/sec)' type graphs show incorrect maximum bandwidth. Please compare the following graph debug pieces to see the difference:

[cacti 0.8.7a]
/usr/bin/rrdtool graph - \
--imgformat=PNG \
--start=-86400 \
--end=-300 \
--title="Cat6509 - Traffic - Blokhaven [TDC: HB903920] - Fa2/9" \
--rigid \
--base=1000 \
--height=120 \
--width=500 \
--alt-autoscale-max \
--lower-limit=0 \
--vertical-label="bits per second" \
--slope-mode \
--font TITLE:12: \
--font AXIS:8: \
--font LEGEND:10: \
--font UNIT:8: \
DEF:a="/var/www/cacti/rra/cat6509_traffic_traffic_in_1193.rrd":traffic_in:AVERAGE \
DEF:b="/var/www/cacti/rra/cat6509_traffic_traffic_in_1193.rrd":traffic_in:MAX \
DEF:c="/var/www/cacti/rra/cat6509_traffic_traffic_in_1193.rrd":traffic_out:AVERAGE \
DEF:d="/var/www/cacti/rra/cat6509_traffic_traffic_in_1193.rrd":traffic_out:MAX \
CDEF:cdefa=a,8,* \
CDEF:cdefd=b,8,* \
CDEF:cdefe=c,8,* \
CDEF:cdefh=d,8,* \
AREA:cdefa#00CF00FF:"Inbound" \
GPRINT:cdefa:LAST:" Current\:%8.2lf %s" \
GPRINT:cdefa:AVERAGE:"Average\:%8.2lf %s" \
GPRINT:cdefd:MAX:"Maximum\:%8.2lf %s\n" \
LINE1:cdefe#002A97FF:"Outbound" \
GPRINT:cdefe:LAST:"Current\:%8.2lf %s" \
GPRINT:cdefe:AVERAGE:"Average\:%8.2lf %s" \
GPRINT:cdefh:MAX:"Maximum\:%8.2lf %s"


[cacti 0.8.7e]
/usr/bin/rrdtool graph - \
--imgformat=PNG \
--start=-86400 \
--end=-300 \
--title="Cat6509 - Traffic - Blokhaven [TDC: HB903920] - Fa2/9" \
--rigid \
--base=1000 \
--height=120 \
--width=500 \
--alt-autoscale-max \
--lower-limit=0 \
--vertical-label="bits per second" \
--slope-mode \
--font TITLE:12: \
--font AXIS:8: \
--font LEGEND:10: \
--font UNIT:8: \
DEF:a="/usr/share/cacti/rra/cat6509_traffic_traffic_in_1193.rrd":traffic_in:AVERAGE \
DEF:b="/usr/share/cacti/rra/cat6509_traffic_traffic_in_1193.rrd":traffic_out:AVERAGE \
CDEF:cdefa=a,8,* \
CDEF:cdefe=b,8,* \
AREA:cdefa#00CF00FF:"Inbound" \
GPRINT:cdefa:LAST:" Current\:%8.2lf%s" \
GPRINT:cdefa:AVERAGE:"Average\:%8.2lf%s" \
GPRINT:cdefa:MAX:"Maximum\:%8.2lf%s\n" \
LINE1:cdefe#002A97FF:"Outbound" \
GPRINT:cdefe:LAST:"Current\:%8.2lf%s" \
GPRINT:cdefe:AVERAGE:"Average\:%8.2lf%s" \
GPRINT:cdefe:MAX:"Maximum\:%8.2lf%s"


As you can see, in the second graph there are only AVERAGE data sources and no MAX data sources. I think this causes the reported value to be incorrect.

Is there anything I can do to correct this behaviour?

Cheers,
Maciek
User avatar
gandalf
Developer
Posts: 22383
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 2:46 am
Location: Muenster, Germany
Contact:

Post by gandalf »

IMHO, it is NOT incorrect. If you refer to the graph template, you will find that you've defined ONLY a CF of AVERAGE, and you've got exactly this.
IMHO, 087a was WRONG and this was corrected.
If you need MAX CF ONLY, please change from AVERAGE to MAX (which is indeed a good idea if you want to see maximum interface usage).
Or see http://docs.cacti.net/usertemplate:grap ... ce_traffic to find a template that shows both, AVERAGE and MAX
R.
mz
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:53 am

Post by mz »

Thanks for your reply, it is very informative.

However, my boss wants to have our old graph template but with the MAX value reported correctly. Could you help me with adding MAX cf to the graph?
User avatar
gandalf
Developer
Posts: 22383
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 2:46 am
Location: Muenster, Germany
Contact:

Post by gandalf »

mz wrote:Thanks for your reply, it is very informative.

However, my boss wants to have our old graph template but with the MAX value reported correctly. Could you help me with adding MAX cf to the graph?
In fact, that is what my advertised template shows, a correct MAX value. So why do you have problems?
If you indeed want to show MAX only, NO average, then please edit all graph items of that template and select MAX in favour of AVERAGE wherever that appears. Personally, I like my approach better :-?
R.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest