imo, 1920 will be common for quite a while yet. any chance you can make the scaling formulaic, based on a config parameter? that way you only have to do it once, forever. (bonus: mbp folks are happy, you can be lazy when 8k shows up, etc…) R.
On May 27, 2014, at 1:56, observium-request@observium.org wrote:
Hi All,
Are any of you running 4k displays yet?
We've been thinking about how to handle larger displays and were considering jumping straight from the existing 1280px wide to 3840px rather than building a 'widescreen' mode on 1920px.
I think it would be most noticeable in the amount and resolution of the graphs we could display. We could effectively fit twice the amount of data into each graph. It would probably require quite a lot of work, so it's important we get the resolution correct!
(no, i don't care about your macbook pro's silly resolution)
adam.
Rather than change the layout just let the layout scale to the display size - div widths as percentages?
From: observium [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] On Behalf Of Rob VanHooren Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2014 21:04 To: observium@observium.org Subject: Re: [Observium] 4k
imo, 1920 will be common for quite a while yet.
any chance you can make the scaling formulaic, based on a config parameter?
that way you only have to do it once, forever.
(bonus: mbp folks are happy, you can be lazy when 8k shows up, etc.)
R.
On May 27, 2014, at 1:56, observium-request@observium.org mailto:observium-request@observium.org wrote:
Hi All,
Are any of you running 4k displays yet?
We've been thinking about how to handle larger displays and were considering jumping straight from the existing 1280px wide to 3840px rather than building a 'widescreen' mode on 1920px.
I think it would be most noticeable in the amount and resolution of the graphs we could display. We could effectively fit twice the amount of data into each graph. It would probably require quite a lot of work, so it's important we get the resolution correct!
(no, i don't care about your macbook pro's silly resolution)
adam.
Images don't scale the same way, which is what Adam is talking about - divs are bootstrapped column width things which we can probably make whatever the current web4.5 term is; but you can't stretch the graphs - they need to be generated with a certain width etc. :)
On 27/05/2014 13:17, Bruce Guthrie wrote:
Rather than change the layout just let the layout scale to the display size -- div widths as percentages?
*From:*observium [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] *On Behalf Of *Rob VanHooren *Sent:* Tuesday, 27 May 2014 21:04 *To:* observium@observium.org *Subject:* Re: [Observium] 4k
imo, 1920 will be common for quite a while yet.
any chance you can make the scaling formulaic, based on a config parameter?
that way you only have to do it once, forever.
(bonus: mbp folks are happy, you can be lazy when 8k shows up, etc...)
R.
On May 27, 2014, at 1:56, observium-request@observium.org mailto:observium-request@observium.org wrote:
Hi All, Are any of you running 4k displays yet? We've been thinking about how to handle larger displays and were considering jumping straight from the existing 1280px wide to 3840px rather than building a 'widescreen' mode on 1920px. I think it would be most noticeable in the amount and resolution of the graphs we could display. We could effectively fit twice the amount of data into each graph. It would probably require quite a lot of work, so it's important we get the resolution correct! (no, i don't care about your macbook pro's silly resolution) adam.
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
Image can be scaled - they might not be as pretty depending on the underlying resolution of the image but they will scale. You could for example increase the resolution of the images and scale them in the web page to suit the display resolution?
From: observium [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] On Behalf Of Tom Laermans Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2014 21:54 To: Observium Network Observation System Subject: Re: [Observium] 4k
Images don't scale the same way, which is what Adam is talking about - divs are bootstrapped column width things which we can probably make whatever the current web4.5 term is; but you can't stretch the graphs - they need to be generated with a certain width etc. :)
On 27/05/2014 13:17, Bruce Guthrie wrote:
Rather than change the layout just let the layout scale to the display size - div widths as percentages?
From: observium [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] On Behalf Of Rob VanHooren Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2014 21:04 To: observium@observium.org mailto:observium@observium.org Subject: Re: [Observium] 4k
imo, 1920 will be common for quite a while yet.
any chance you can make the scaling formulaic, based on a config parameter?
that way you only have to do it once, forever.
(bonus: mbp folks are happy, you can be lazy when 8k shows up, etc.)
R.
On May 27, 2014, at 1:56, observium-request@observium.org mailto:observium-request@observium.org wrote:
Hi All,
Are any of you running 4k displays yet?
We've been thinking about how to handle larger displays and were considering jumping straight from the existing 1280px wide to 3840px rather than building a 'widescreen' mode on 1920px.
I think it would be most noticeable in the amount and resolution of the graphs we could display. We could effectively fit twice the amount of data into each graph. It would probably require quite a lot of work, so it's important we get the resolution correct!
(no, i don't care about your macbook pro's silly resolution)
adam.
_______________________________________________ observium mailing list observium@observium.org mailto:observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
Sorry, neither approach makes sense to me. :)
On 05/27/2014 02:38 PM, Bruce Guthrie wrote:
Image can be scaled -- they might not be as pretty depending on the underlying resolution of the image but they will scale. You could for example increase the resolution of the images and scale them in the web page to suit the display resolution?
*From:*observium [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] *On Behalf Of *Tom Laermans *Sent:* Tuesday, 27 May 2014 21:54 *To:* Observium Network Observation System *Subject:* Re: [Observium] 4k
Images don't scale the same way, which is what Adam is talking about - divs are bootstrapped column width things which we can probably make whatever the current web4.5 term is; but you can't stretch the graphs
- they need to be generated with a certain width etc. :)
On 27/05/2014 13:17, Bruce Guthrie wrote:
Rather than change the layout just let the layout scale to the display size -- div widths as percentages? *From:*observium [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] *On Behalf Of *Rob VanHooren *Sent:* Tuesday, 27 May 2014 21:04 *To:* observium@observium.org <mailto:observium@observium.org> *Subject:* Re: [Observium] 4k imo, 1920 will be common for quite a while yet. any chance you can make the scaling formulaic, based on a config parameter? that way you only have to do it once, forever. (bonus: mbp folks are happy, you can be lazy when 8k shows up, etc...) R. On May 27, 2014, at 1:56, observium-request@observium.org <mailto:observium-request@observium.org> wrote: Hi All, Are any of you running 4k displays yet? We've been thinking about how to handle larger displays and were considering jumping straight from the existing 1280px wide to 3840px rather than building a 'widescreen' mode on 1920px. I think it would be most noticeable in the amount and resolution of the graphs we could display. We could effectively fit twice the amount of data into each graph. It would probably require quite a lot of work, so it's important we get the resolution correct! (no, i don't care about your macbook pro's silly resolution) adam. _______________________________________________ observium mailing list observium@observium.org <mailto: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
Sounds great, does github.com/shopik/rrdtool have the version with svg support? =)
On 05/27/2014 03:13 PM, Nikolay Shopik wrote:
SVG does
On 27/05/14 15:53, Tom Laermans wrote:
Images don't scale the same way
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
[-a|--imgformat PNG|SVG|EPS|PDF]
________________________________________ From: observium [observium-bounces@observium.org] on behalf of Tom Laermans [tom.laermans@powersource.cx] Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2014 10:50 PM To: Observium Network Observation System Subject: Re: [Observium] 4k
Sounds great, does github.com/shopik/rrdtool have the version with svg support? =)
On 05/27/2014 03:13 PM, Nikolay Shopik wrote:
SVG does
On 27/05/14 15:53, Tom Laermans wrote:
Images don't scale the same way
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
Aww, I should have checked ;)
I wonder how/if that would work though - I'm not sure browsers like rendering 200 SVGs as opposed to ramming bitmap data onto the screen...
Would be interesting to see a test of this though!
On 05/27/2014 03:24 PM, Peter Childs wrote:
[-a|--imgformat PNG|SVG|EPS|PDF]
From: observium [observium-bounces@observium.org] on behalf of Tom Laermans [tom.laermans@powersource.cx] Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2014 10:50 PM To: Observium Network Observation System Subject: Re: [Observium] 4k
Sounds great, does github.com/shopik/rrdtool have the version with svg support? =)
On 05/27/2014 03:13 PM, Nikolay Shopik wrote:
SVG does
On 27/05/14 15:53, Tom Laermans wrote:
Images don't scale the same way
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 _______________________________________________ observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
mod_compress or similar... :)
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 6:32 AM, Nikolay Shopik shopik@inblock.ru wrote:
rendering isn't issue last I checked, but size of graphs will be much larger. So overally you has to download more compare to PNG.
On 27/05/14 17:29, Tom Laermans wrote:
Would be interesting to see a test of this though!
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
Hey Guys,
what is about RRD's consolidation Function? If you want more Pixels that represent Data then you need more PDP's and less CDP's won´t that take up much more Storage and I/O? Else you will have the same smoothed Graphs on a larger Scale.
Regards,
Sascha
Am 27.05.2014 15:20, schrieb Tom Laermans:
Sounds great, does github.com/shopik/rrdtool have the version with svg support? =)
On 05/27/2014 03:13 PM, Nikolay Shopik wrote:
SVG does
On 27/05/14 15:53, Tom Laermans wrote:
Images don't scale the same way
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
participants (7)
-
Bruce Guthrie -
Michael Loftis -
Nikolay Shopik -
Peter Childs -
Rob VanHooren -
Sascha Schaal -
Tom Laermans