Hi Stig,

Absolutely no problem; although this topic came via an issue on GitHub
rather than on the pmacct-discussion mailing-list; you may want to post
there:

https://github.com/pmacct/pmacct/issues/16

Cheers,
Paolo

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 01:40:07PM -0700, Stig Thormodsrud wrote:
> I hope this isn't against the forum rules to mention another project, but
> like Victor we have a lot of customers that need monthly usage.  I've been
> using vnstat on my home router.  Now it doesn't do application breakdowns
> since that needs dpi, but if monthly usages helps then it might be worth a
> try.   http://humdi.net/vnstat/
> 
> Example output:
> 
> Per month:
> 
> admin@stig-home:~$ vnstat -m
> 
>  eth0  /  monthly
> 
>        month        rx      |     tx      |    total    |   avg. rate
>     ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
>       Oct '15     49.94 GiB |    3.67 GiB |   53.60 GiB |  167.87 kbit/s
>       Nov '15    106.27 GiB |    9.26 GiB |  115.53 GiB |  373.89 kbit/s
>       Dec '15    166.67 GiB |    8.37 GiB |  175.04 GiB |  548.23 kbit/s
>       Jan '16    185.51 GiB |    6.83 GiB |  192.33 GiB |  602.38 kbit/s
>       Feb '16    118.45 GiB |    7.06 GiB |  125.51 GiB |  420.21 kbit/s
>       Mar '16    109.82 GiB |    5.70 GiB |  115.52 GiB |  476.77 kbit/s
>     ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
>     estimated    144.71 GiB |    7.52 GiB |  152.23 GiB |
> 
> 
> admin@stig-home:~$ vnstat -d
> 
>  eth0  /  daily
> 
>          day         rx      |     tx      |    total    |   avg. rate
>      ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
>       02/24/16      1.93 GiB |  512.70 MiB |    2.43 GiB |  236.03 kbit/s
>       02/25/16    980.94 MiB |  265.50 MiB |    1.22 GiB |  118.18 kbit/s
>       02/26/16      6.34 GiB |  305.11 MiB |    6.64 GiB |  644.96 kbit/s
>       02/27/16     13.19 GiB |  414.19 MiB |   13.60 GiB |    1.32 Mbit/s
>       02/28/16      5.37 GiB |  224.21 MiB |    5.59 GiB |  542.47 kbit/s
>       02/29/16      1.50 GiB |  450.65 MiB |    1.94 GiB |  188.62 kbit/s
>       03/01/16      2.30 GiB |  214.90 MiB |    2.51 GiB |  243.49 kbit/s
>       03/02/16      1.24 GiB |  177.02 MiB |    1.41 GiB |  136.85 kbit/s
>       03/03/16      1.32 GiB |  203.94 MiB |    1.52 GiB |  147.29 kbit/s
>       03/04/16      5.38 GiB |  248.26 MiB |    5.62 GiB |  545.56 kbit/s
>       03/05/16     16.40 GiB |  371.50 MiB |   16.76 GiB |    1.63 Mbit/s
>       03/06/16     14.60 GiB |  374.61 MiB |   14.97 GiB |    1.45 Mbit/s
>       03/07/16      1.28 GiB |  462.27 MiB |    1.73 GiB |  167.85 kbit/s
>       03/08/16      1.74 GiB |  274.97 MiB |    2.00 GiB |  194.64 kbit/s
>       03/09/16    748.99 MiB |  217.34 MiB |  966.33 MiB |   91.62 kbit/s
>       03/10/16      1.86 GiB |  209.54 MiB |    2.06 GiB |  200.37 kbit/s
>       03/11/16      5.02 GiB |  262.04 MiB |    5.28 GiB |  512.60 kbit/s
>       03/12/16     10.41 GiB |  304.21 MiB |   10.70 GiB |    1.04 Mbit/s
>       03/13/16      9.72 GiB |  326.63 MiB |   10.04 GiB |  974.51 kbit/s
>       03/14/16      1.83 GiB |  197.54 MiB |    2.02 GiB |  196.01 kbit/s
>       03/15/16      3.39 GiB |  186.71 MiB |    3.57 GiB |  346.90 kbit/s
>       03/16/16      1.40 GiB |  185.31 MiB |    1.58 GiB |  153.47 kbit/s
>       03/17/16      1.37 GiB |  180.40 MiB |    1.55 GiB |  150.07 kbit/s
>       03/18/16      1.71 GiB |  213.81 MiB |    1.91 GiB |  185.81 kbit/s
>       03/19/16     12.28 GiB |  412.81 MiB |   12.69 GiB |    1.23 Mbit/s
>       03/20/16      8.77 GiB |  284.41 MiB |    9.04 GiB |  878.12 kbit/s
>       03/21/16    872.39 MiB |  135.04 MiB |    0.98 GiB |   95.52 kbit/s
>       03/22/16      3.39 GiB |  192.81 MiB |    3.58 GiB |  347.33 kbit/s
>       03/23/16      2.68 GiB |  149.60 MiB |    2.82 GiB |  274.16 kbit/s
>       03/24/16    179.13 MiB |   55.53 MiB |  234.66 MiB |   39.25 kbit/s
>      ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
>      estimated       315 MiB |      97 MiB |     412 MiB |
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Paolo Lucente <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
> > Dear Victor: no, pmacct is not meant to count traffic per application on a
> > system. It is an interesting case but i also can't help pointing you to an
> > application able to do that. Cheers, Paolo
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
> > <https://github.com/pmacct/pmacct/issues/16#issuecomment-200981165>
> >

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


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

Reply via email to