Correct CDEFs in Aggregate Graph

[tonialb]

Hi,

I created two aggregate graphs(traffic_in). To make it as simple as possible:

Aggregate 1:
Graph A
Graph B
Graph C
Graph D
TOTAL (A+B+C+D)[/i]
Aggregate 2:
Graph E
Graph F
Graph G
Graph H
TOTAL (E+F+G+H)

What I want to achieve is, to collect them all in one big graph like this:

Graph A
Graph B
Graph C
Graph D
TOTAL (A+B+C+D)
Graph E
Graph F
Graph G
Graph H
TOTAL (E+F+G+H)

Visually I did it, but the problem that worries me is the TOTAL graph. Both show the same value, the total value of all sources! Logical, because I used _AGGREGATE ALL Turn Bytes into Bits in CDEFs.

Can anyone help me with this situation? Any string which can I use correctly in CDEFs?



Thanks

[Dummy]

You can try to define a CDEF like this:

1st CDEF:
a,b+,c+,d+ which will give you the Total of A,B,C,D

2nd CDEF:
e,f,+,g,+,h,+ gives you the Total of E,F,G,H

or all together:
a,b,+,c,+,d,+,e,+,f,+,g,+,h,+

[tonialb]

@Dummy

Thanks for the idea!

Managed to fix the issue using this CDEF like this: a,b,c,d,e,+,+,+,8,*

So, I created two of them:
SUM_A+B+C+D_Turn Bytes into Bits: a,b,c,d,+,+,+,8,*
SUM_E+F+G+H_Turn Bytes into Bits: e,f,g,h,+,+,+,8,*

I'm not sure if this string was typed correct, but the aggr. graph appeared with no errors , also the values were all correct.


thnx

[TheWitness]

The RPN acronym is either racist, or nationalist depending on if you are of the half empty or half full persuasion. If you are the half full type, it's an acknowledgement that the author must have been a great Polish inventor, who did everything like he was writing in assembler. If you are of the half empty type, when you hear "Reverse Polish Notation", you don't think, you are simply triggered cause you don't understand. I'm of the former variety, and learned to use RPN decades ago before modern calculators were invented. It takes some getting used to, but if you think, have an engineering mind, it's super easy.

[tonialb]

Looks like I'm an "half empty type". That why I looked for help.