I think the problem with the inaccuracies was the fact that poll-billing.php was not executable after the most recent update I did.
Kind regards,
Mahomed Hussein Senior Operations Engineer Custodian DataCentre tel: +44 (0)1622 230382 email: Mahomed@CustodianDC.com http://www.custodiandc.com/disclaimer.txt
-----Original Message----- From: observium-bounces@observium.org [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] On Behalf Of Mahomed Hussein Sent: 29 September 2011 12:39 To: Observium Network Observation System Subject: Re: [Observium] 95th Billing is inaccurate
Hi
Attached is a screenshot of the weekly and monthly graphs on Cacti. As you can see, the traffic seems to match the quick graphs on Observium, but not the accurate graphs. And the 95th then doesn't look right.
I must admit, I am a bit confused with it now and I hope I am not the one who is looking at it wrong.
Kind regards,
Mahomed Hussein Senior Operations Engineer Custodian DataCentre tel: +44 (0)1622 230382 email: Mahomed@CustodianDC.com http://www.custodiandc.com/disclaimer.txt
-----Original Message----- From: observium-bounces@observium.org [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] On Behalf Of Nikolay Shopik Sent: 29 September 2011 11:57 To: Observium Network Observation System Subject: Re: [Observium] 95th Billing is inaccurate
Cacti output has different time window than observium. 95th calculate on time window you watching. So in cacti you have 95h for your 6 hour window while on observium is 2 weeks 95th. Check same time window and you see they will be same
On 29/09/11 14:38, Mahomed Hussein wrote:
Hi Nikolay
Thanks for the response. I have checked the port under devices in Observium and the 95th does not match the billing, but the traffic matches. We also graph the traffic on Cacti and that matches the traffic shown in observium but the 95th on Cacti is still far less than that on Observium. I have attached the ports screenshot and the cacti screenshot. Please let me know if you need any further info.
Kind regards,
Mahomed Hussein Senior Operations Engineer Custodian DataCentre tel: +44 (0)1622 230382 email: Mahomed@CustodianDC.com http://www.custodiandc.com/disclaimer.txt
-----Original Message----- From: observium-bounces@observium.org [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] On Behalf Of Nikolay Shopik Sent: 29 September 2011 11:24 To: Observium Network Observation System Subject: Re: [Observium] 95th Billing is inaccurate
Mahomed,
Have you check what real ports 95th shows, not billing graphs?
On 29/09/11 13:54, Mahomed Hussein wrote:
Hi
We are having some more trouble with 95^th billing. It seems that even on clients who are using very little (or nothing at all as they aren't using the ports yet) are showing an over usage on their 95^th . Is there an easy way to correct this? Will I have to clear the database to fix this? I've pasted a screenshot below.
Any help will be sincerely appreciated.
Kind regards,
*Mahomed Hussein*
Senior Operations Engineer
**Custodian DataCentrehttp://www.custodiandc.com/
*Tel: *
*+44 (0)1622 230 382*
*Email: *
*Mahomed@CustodianDC.com*<mailto:support@CustodianDC.com>*Web: *
*www.CustodianDC.com*http://www.custodiandc.com/
*Status: *
*status.CustDC.net*http://status.custdc.net/
ISO:27001 IS:567248*
Click to view our email disclaimer http://www.custodiandc.com/disclaimer.txt
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium This e-mail has been scanned by www.CustodianDC.com for viruses, explicit material and spam
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
_______________________________________________ observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium