Hi Alex, Isn't this the same as the case I documented recently for my Geiger counter where I have a step size of 1 minute and update an ABSOLUTE counter every 5 minutes. See below I am updating every 5 seconds with integral values "returned count=x". In the minute from 1365867005 to 1365867060, I did update 0+0+3+2+1+1+2+1+5+2+2+3=22 with result 0.36438774029 which I don't understand at all.
updatev returned: return_value = 0 [1365867000]RRA[AVERAGE][1]DS[geiger] = 5.6636103674e-01 time=1365867005, returned count = 0 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867010, returned count = 0 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867015, returned count = 3 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867020, returned count = 2 updatev returned: return_value = 0 saving incomplete line <CPS, 1, > time=1365867025, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867030, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867035, returned count = 2 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867040, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867045, returned count = 5 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867050, returned count = 2 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867055, returned count = 2 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867060, returned count = 3 updatev returned: return_value = 0 [1365867060]RRA[AVERAGE][1]DS[geiger] = 3.6438774029e-01 time=1365867065, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867070, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867075, returned count = 4 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867080, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867085, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867090, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867095, returned count = 0 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867100, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867105, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867110, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867115, returned count = 1 updatev returned: return_value = 0 time=1365867120, returned count = 0 updatev returned: return_value = 0 [1365867120]RRA[AVERAGE][1]DS[geiger] = 2.1964405340e-01 The db definition is as follows: rrdtool create geiger.rrd -s 60 DS:geiger:ABSOLUTE:100:0:U \ RRA:AVERAGE:0.5:1:50000 \ RRA:MIN:0.5:60:8800 \ RRA:MAX:0.5:60:8800 \ RRA:AVERAGE:0.5:60:8800 \ RRA:MIN:0.5:1440:7305 \ RRA:MAX:0.5:1440:7305 \ RRA:AVERAGE:0.5:1440:7305 -----Original Message----- From: rrd-users-bounces+alan.websites2=chankly....@lists.oetiker.ch [mailto:rrd-users-bounces+alan.websites2=chankly....@lists.oetiker.ch] On Behalf Of Alex van den Bogaerdt Sent: Thursday, 18 April 2013 8:34 AM To: rrd-users@lists.oetiker.ch Subject: Re: [rrd-users] Dynamic Steps > I don't think that I will ever hit that limit. But the moment I have > more than one tick per second I loose the precision with rrdtool, > don't I? If there are more updates per second, then rrdtool calculates > the average of the values that have been sent that second, which gives > me an average of > 3600 again. So even if 10800VA are utilized I end up with 3600 and the > wrong information of the consumed power. No. If you update at time "t1", and then at time "t2" again, and if the interval "t2-t1" is less than one second, you end up with a rate (Joules per second in your case) which is higher than 3600. Do this a couple of times in one second, and RRDtool will use that higher rate, no problem. _______________________________________________ rrd-users mailing list rrd-users@lists.oetiker.ch https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-users _______________________________________________ rrd-users mailing list rrd-users@lists.oetiker.ch https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-users
