Problem when removing graph items

[snowgasm]

I have made a custom graph via the "new graph" link in the top left menu. I have defined 120 items in this graph so that i have one graph with all the lines in it, so that i can easily see what spikes were at the same time to locate the source of the problem much faster, instead of viewing 100 graphs after each other. (Maybe this advanced reporting wish could be a feuture request).

The problem:
Some of these counters refer to systems which are not longer in my infrastructure, so i could easily delete these graph items. The only problem is, i also have tons of CDEF's defined for these graph items, so also for these graph items of computers which don't exist anymore. This means when I delete the graph items, all DEF gets renamed -> what once was C is now A (when i should have deleted 2 items from the graph items list). This is primarly not a problem, but now ALL of the CDEF's don't match the DEF items anymore, so all math functions are screwed.

Example:

DEF:a="C\:/cacti2/rra/net_01_cpu_69.rrd":cpu:AVERAGE \
DEF:b="C\:/cacti2/rra/net_02_cpu_76.rrd":cpu:AVERAGE \
DEF:c="C\:/cacti2/rra/net_02_cpu_77.rrd":cpu:AVERAGE \

I delete one graph item which defines DEF b. What once was C now gets DEF B

DEF:a="C\:/cacti2/rra/net_01_cpu_69.rrd":cpu:AVERAGE \
DEF:b="C\:/cacti2/rra/net_02_cpu_77.rrd":cpu:AVERAGE \

So all my CDEF which used to refer to DEF C are not working anymore. For 10 graph items, this would not be a huge problem, but a custom graph of 120 items and growing is a hell of a job.

Where should i find a solution for this problem, maybe another way of defining the CDEF's?

[snowgasm]

hmm, strange i am the only one with this question? I hope someone will be able to point in the right direction

Thanks!

[BSOD2600]

I don't think there is any graceful work around for this...

[gandalf]

You may introduce a dummy rrd that will be filled by some dumb script will zeroes only. Then, you may replace all unwanted data sources by that dummy thingy. This is nasty, of course
Reinhard

[snowgasm]

well, it's nasty yes, but i guess it won't take away any systemtime, like it does when it's processing an existing data source, with a non-existing target.

Anyway, i got myself a new problem now:

http://forums.cacti.net/viewtopic.php?t=12513

It seems it has something to do with a charachter limit of the dos prompt in windows...