I would have to sheepishly admit at this stage that after the upgrade I failed 
to kill the first nfacctd process completely and upon further inspection I had 
TWO processes running, which I would assume was giving me the increase in data 
stats.

This does raise one question for me though, how come the second process was 
able to start and access the stats from the first process to be able to write 
them to the DB as well. I haven't done a lot of programming, but I'm fairly 
sure that only one process can bind to a port, so if both of the instances were 
started with the same config file, they would both attempt to use the same TCP 
port. The first process would succeed, the second would fail. This should mean 
that only one nfacctd process is receiving the netflow packets from the router, 
but both of the running processes are able to write the same stats to the SQL 
DB ? Is this because it uses some shared memory for communication between the 
process that accepts the netflow packets and the second process that writes to 
the DB ?

I can't see any error messages in the logs to indicate that the second process 
started and was unable to bind to the correct port either ?


At this point everything appears to be back to normal with the 64-bit counters. 

Thanks for the pointer in the right direction.


regards,
Tony.


--- On Fri, 24/12/10, Paolo Lucente <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Paolo Lucente <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [pmacct-discussion] potentially missing data
> To: "Tony" <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Received: Friday, 24 December, 2010, 9:35 PM
> Hi Tony,
> 
> If the C7600 is the only NetFlow exporter to nfacctd,
> traffic at
> the router is counted once (ie. collected ingress-only) and
> a single
> nfacctd writing to the 'internet' table you should never
> get into
> the situation of overestimated counters. pmacct by itself
> is not
> able to duplicate traffic counters; and i've not been
> repored so
> far similar behaviours from C7600 with SRC/SRD/SRE codes



      

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

Reply via email to