Hi,

After compiling with 64-bit I am getting larger values, but now I seem to be 
getting up to TWICE as much as I should ? Is this a known bug, or something 
that I should have changed when I upgraded ?

The link has continued to be used at 10Mbps, so the usage each hour should 
remain around 4.5GB. The numbers between 0200-0400 are probably correct as 
there was a slight lull in usage at this time to an average of perhaps roughly 
6Mbps.

I changed to the 64-bit 0.12.4 version of pmacct at 2330.


mysql> select bytes/1000000000 as GB,  stamp_inserted, stamp_updated from 
internet where agent_id = 1 and stamp_inserted > '2010-12-23 14:00:00' and 
ip_dst = 'x.y.23.200' order by 3 desc;
+---------+---------------------+---------------------+
| GB      | stamp_inserted      | stamp_updated       |
+---------+---------------------+---------------------+
| 10.8867 | 2010-12-24 09:00:00 | 2010-12-24 10:00:01 |
|  9.3094 | 2010-12-24 08:00:00 | 2010-12-24 09:00:01 |
| 11.4398 | 2010-12-24 07:00:00 | 2010-12-24 08:00:01 |
|  8.8432 | 2010-12-24 06:00:00 | 2010-12-24 07:00:01 |
|  4.8371 | 2010-12-24 05:00:00 | 2010-12-24 06:00:01 |
|  4.7354 | 2010-12-24 04:00:00 | 2010-12-24 05:00:01 |
|  3.1966 | 2010-12-24 03:00:00 | 2010-12-24 04:00:01 |
|  2.2933 | 2010-12-24 02:00:00 | 2010-12-24 03:00:01 |
|  4.8357 | 2010-12-24 01:00:00 | 2010-12-24 02:00:01 |
|  6.9992 | 2010-12-24 00:00:00 | 2010-12-24 01:00:01 |
|  0.2545 | 2010-12-23 23:00:00 | 2010-12-24 00:00:01 |
|  0.5420 | 2010-12-23 22:00:00 | 2010-12-23 23:00:01 |
|  0.5429 | 2010-12-23 21:00:00 | 2010-12-23 22:00:01 |
|  0.7547 | 2010-12-23 20:00:00 | 2010-12-23 21:00:01 |
|  2.9795 | 2010-12-23 19:00:00 | 2010-12-23 20:00:01 |
|  2.3076 | 2010-12-23 18:00:00 | 2010-12-23 19:00:01 |
|  0.1109 | 2010-12-23 17:00:00 | 2010-12-23 18:00:01 |
|  0.2496 | 2010-12-23 16:00:00 | 2010-12-23 17:00:01 |
|  0.1036 | 2010-12-23 15:00:00 | 2010-12-23 16:00:01 |
+---------+---------------------+---------------------+
19 rows in set (0.00 sec)


Any ideas ?


Thanks,
Tony.



--- On Thu, 23/12/10, Paolo Lucente <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Paolo Lucente <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [pmacct-discussion] potentially missing data
> To: [email protected]
> Received: Thursday, 23 December, 2010, 6:22 PM
> Hi Tony,
> 
> The TCAM utilization you posted seems to suggest the C7600
> is
> OK; but having a look to how the NetFlow export is
> configured
> on the box (interface + global commands) wouldn't hurt.
> 
> What is interesting is the huge jumps in the bytes counter
> in
> the table you posted; was pmacct compiled for 64-bit
> counters?
> can you post your pmacct configuration? can you also post
> the
> SQL query you use in order to get that table?
> 
> A propo of the math: it appears to my eyes 10Mbps * 8 *
> 3600
> is much more than 4-5GB/hr?
> 
> Cheers,
> Paolo
> 
> 
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 08:33:57PM -0800, Tony wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I have just noticed that the results being returned by
> pmacct do not match up with the real data.
> > 
> > The configuration is:
> > 
> > Internet -- c7609 -- 10M fiber -- c3550 -- customer
> > 
> > We are exporting netflow stats from the Cisco 7609 and
> I am aware of the limitations on this platform, but the
> total data through the 7609 that we are trying to export
> flow stats for is in the order of 50Mbps (max) so hopefully
> we should not be exceeding anything on the box.
> > 
> > It doesn't LOOK like the 7609 is dropping any stats
> (although I am no expert on 7609 netflow):
> > 
> > #show ip flow export
> > Flow export v9 is enabled for main cache
> >   Export source and destination details
> :
> >   VRF ID : Default
> >     Source(1)   
>    10.1.1.115 (Vlan2)
> >     Destination(1)  10.1.1.38
> (6789)
> >   Version 9 flow records
> >   13267046 flows exported in 1142685
> udp datagrams
> >   0 flows failed due to lack of export
> packet
> >   0 export packets were sent up to
> process level
> >   1 export packets were dropped due to
> no fib
> >   0 export packets were dropped due to
> adjacency issues
> >   0 export packets were dropped due to
> fragmentation failures
> >   0 export packets were dropped due to
> encapsulation fixup failures
> >   0 export packets were dropped
> enqueuing for the RP
> >   0 export packets were dropped due to
> IPC rate limiting
> >   0 export packets were dropped due to
> Card not being able to export
> > 
> > 
> > #show mls netflow table-contention summary
> > Earl in Module 6
> > Summary of Netflow CAM Utilization (as a percentage)
> > ====================================================
> > TCAM Utilization         
>    :   1%
> > ICAM Utilization         
>    :   0%
> > Netflow Creation Failures   
> :   0
> > Netflow CAM aliases         
> :   0
> > 
> > 
> > The difference is quite large. The number from pmacct
> are (from MySQL exported data):
> > 
> >
> +------------+---------------------+---------------------+
> > | bytes      | stamp_inserted 
>     | stamp_updated   
>    |
> >
> +------------+---------------------+---------------------+
> > | 3505877423 | 2010-12-23 11:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 12:00:01 |
> > |  114559834 | 2010-12-23 10:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 11:00:01 |
> > |  107033171 | 2010-12-23 09:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 10:00:01 |
> > | 2248788510 | 2010-12-23 08:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 09:00:01 |
> > |  730948403 | 2010-12-23 07:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 08:00:01 |
> > | 1432262718 | 2010-12-23 06:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 07:00:01 |
> > |  542630778 | 2010-12-23 05:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 06:00:01 |
> > |  546202726 | 2010-12-23 04:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 05:00:01 |
> > |  505622657 | 2010-12-23 03:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 04:00:01 |
> > |  545262871 | 2010-12-23 02:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 03:00:01 |
> > | 2704448981 | 2010-12-23 01:00:00 | 2010-12-23
> 02:00:01 |
> >
> +------------+---------------------+---------------------+
> > 
> > Whereas the number from the interface stats on the
> 3550 are (from PRTG):
> > 
> > 
> > Date Time?    Traffic out (volume)
> > 23/12/2010 11:00:00 AM - 12:00:00 PM   
> 3,637,126 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 10:00:00 AM - 11:00:00 AM   
> 4,265,164 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 9:00:00 AM - 10:00:00 AM   
> 4,266,288 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 8:00:00 AM - 9:00:00 AM   
> 4,137,007 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 7:00:00 AM - 8:00:00 AM   
> 4,290,950 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 6:00:00 AM - 7:00:00 AM   
> 4,705,733 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 5:00:00 AM - 6:00:00 AM   
> 4,861,328 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 4:00:00 AM - 5:00:00 AM   
> 4,809,456 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 3:00:00 AM - 4:00:00 AM   
> 4,564,060 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 2:00:00 AM - 3:00:00 AM   
> 4,855,658 KByte
> > 23/12/2010 1:00:00 AM - 2:00:00 AM   
> 4,865,965 KByte
> > 
> > 
> > The customer is flogging the 10Mbps link at full speed
> (which is fine, not concerned about that, they are entitled
> to) and so the correct figure is as reported by the
> interface stats of between 4-5GB per hour. If you do the
> math, this works out correct, 10Mbps = 4.5GB/hr.
> > 
> > The results from pmacct are way short of what they
> should be.
> > 
> > I'm open to suggestions on where to look to diagnose
> what is going on and why pmacct is not correct.
> > 
> > I'm running 0.12.0rc2 and will look at upgrading in
> the next week or so, but I'm not sure that will make any
> difference (are there any bugs that might be causing this
> ?).
> > 
> > I don't know if it is just stats for this customer
> being affected, but I would suspect that it is probably
> showing less than it should across the board.
> > 
> > Apologies if this would be better directed at the
> c-nsp list, but I don't think the problem is on the Cisco
> side (although I'm happy to investigate this further if
> anyone can point in the right direction).
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Tony.
> > 
> > 
> >       
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > pmacct-discussion mailing list
> > http://www.pmacct.net/#mailinglists
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pmacct-discussion mailing list
> http://www.pmacct.net/#mailinglists
> 


      

_______________________________________________
pmacct-discussion mailing list
http://www.pmacct.net/#mailinglists

Reply via email to