In a troubleshooting situation I think real time is valid. Off course, is non-sense doing this for "normal" monitoring...
But firstly define: What's real-time? every second? miliseconds? 10 seconds? 30 seconds? It's subjective nowadays 2012/5/4 David Miller <dmil...@tiggee.com> > On 5/4/2012 6:53 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote: > > Anurag Bhatia wrote: > >> I have been using Zenoss quite a bit. It does not shows exact real time > >> stat of interface but close to real time + it has ton more options for > > > > I remember someone here saying that real time monitoring gives you > > useless results, because if you make the time of measurement small > > enough the utilisation becomes 100%. Measurement of throughput is how > > many times this happens during a particular time interval. I hope I > > remembered right. > > > > I think you are referring to this thread - > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/nanog/users/149903 > > and in particular this quote: > cjp at 0x1 wrote on Feb 16, 2012, 11:25am > As sampling rate approaches zero, so will the "spikyness" of the > graph--ultimately an interface is either sending a frame (*100*%) or > it's > not (0%). > > -cjp > > > Utilisation doesn't "become 100%", instead measured utilisation will > either be 100% or 0% at each interval. > > -DMM > > > -- []'s Lívio Zanol Puppim
