On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 07:16:37PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > reopen 565219 ! > retitle 565219 qa.debian.org: bug history graphs are updated with excessive > delay > thanks > > > On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:23:55 +0100 Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > On Wed, 20 Jan 2010, Francesco Poli wrote: > > > If I understand correctly, the problem I reported is now fixed: as a > > > consequence, I think this bug report may be safely closed as fixed. > > > > Doing so with this mail. > > I am reopening this bug report, since it seems to me that the bug > history graphs, although regenerated daily, get out-of-date data, not > in sync with the packages.qa.debian.org summary. > > For example: a new minor bug was filed against apt-listbugs on Wed, 10 > Feb 2010 21:11:15 +0100, bringing the total number of bugs from 20 to > 21. > The packages.qa.debian.org summary changed on thursday morning, but the > history graph (the one generated on 11-Feb-2010 12:29) still said 20 > bugs. > Today the history graph (generated on 12-Feb-2010 12:30) says 21 bugs, > as it should. > > I noticed the same behavior in other cases, with other packages: the > graphs were updated with a two days delay (or even more). > > However it is my understanding that the graphs are regenerated daily. > > What's wrong? > Are graphs generated on the basis of out-of-date data? > Is there anything I failed to understand?
As I said earlier, the RRD files are not properly configured, and aggregation doesn't allow for quick updates of the bug numbers. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
