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 DataCentre http://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

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

Looks like I spoke too soon. Now one of our clients is showing a very improbable rate of 25.09Gbps.

Can anyone please suggest how to fix this?

On another note, am I just doing something wrong because I'm wondering if anyone else is using this successfully.

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: Mahomed Hussein Sent: 03 October 2011 11:18 To: Observium Network Observation System Subject: RE: [Observium] 95th Billing is inaccurate

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,

-----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

Hi Nikolay

Thanks for the response but I don't think it's related. The peaks you mentioned are related to rrdtool and rrd. As far as I can tell observium doesn't use the stats in the rrd file to do the 95th billing (as rrd averages over time and makes the billing inaccurate). The stats it uses are from its own polls that are stored in the DB.

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: 03 October 2011 11:43 To: Observium Network Observation System Subject: Re: [Observium] 95th Billing is inaccurate

It could be one issue I reported few threads before. Look for "huge peaks on interfaces", it may be unrelated to your issue, but anyway sound familiar too me.

On 03/10/11 14:29, Mahomed Hussein wrote:

Looks like I spoke too soon. Now one of our clients is showing a very improbable rate of 25.09Gbps.

Can anyone please suggest how to fix this?

On another note, am I just doing something wrong because I'm wondering if anyone else is using this successfully.

_______________________________________________ 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

Thanks Tom. Will the "removespikes.php" work for the billing in this case or will I have to work out a manual way?

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 Tom Laermans Sent: 03 October 2011 12:53 To: observium@observium.org Subject: Re: [Observium] 95th Billing is inaccurate

On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 12:29 +0100, Mahomed Hussein wrote:

Hi Nikolay

Thanks for the response but I don't think it's related. The peaks you mentioned are related to rrdtool and rrd. As far as I can tell observium doesn't use the stats in the rrd file to do the 95th billing (as rrd averages over time and makes the billing inaccurate). The stats it uses are from its own polls that are stored in the DB.

That may be true, but the same issues apply, if the counter is reset, Observium will act the same as RRDtool.

Tom

_______________________________________________ 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

Hmm. Are the 'detailed' graphs in billing accurate too?

It's just the text and the percentage bar that's wrong?

adam.

On 29/09/2011 11:38, 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

The output is calculated based on the data it has. if there are only 100 data points, point 95 is the 95th value.

Note that the billing data isn't fitted into rigid 5-min timeslots either, on each poll it calculates a differential of both time and value from the previous measurement, so you can run it at any frequency you want (and so data isn't lost if you miss a polling cycle or three). This can make the graph look a bit odd at times.

There's a known bug where not all the graphs show the correct 95th line, it'll be fixed when I go back through and rewrite the old bits of that code.

The two test bills on the demo install seem to have the correct data, but those measurements come from the demo host itself. The polling may produce erratic results if it's being done on a network with any packet loss, but so long as it's all in the same datacentre that shouldn't matter.

adam.

On 29/09/2011 12:33, Mahomed Hussein wrote:

Hi

The accurate graphs seem to match the bar. It looks like it's the text below the quick graphs that may be wrong. Looking at Cacti, I think the bar may actually be correct. I wonder if the fact that the customer only came in half way through the month may be skewing the figures.

4 more screenshots attached.

Kind regards,

*Mahomed Hussein*

Senior Operations Engineer

**Custodian DataCentre http://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

*From:*observium-bounces@observium.org [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] *On Behalf Of *Adam Armstrong *Sent:* 29 September 2011 11:59 *To:* Observium Network Observation System *Subject:* Re: [Observium] 95th Billing is inaccurate

Hmm. Are the 'detailed' graphs in billing accurate too?

It's just the text and the percentage bar that's wrong?

adam.

On 29/09/2011 11:38, 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 mailto:Mahomed@CustodianDC.com http://www.custodiandc.com/disclaimer.txt

-----Original Message----- From:observium-bounces@observium.org mailto: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 DataCentre<http://www.custodiandc.com/>











*Tel: *







*+44 (0)1622 230 382*



*Email: *



       *Mahomed@CustodianDC.com*  <mailto:*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  <mailto:observium@observium.org>

http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium

---

observium mailing list observium@observium.org mailto:observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium This e-mail has been scanned bywww.CustodianDC.com http://www.CustodianDC.com for viruses, explicit material and spam

---

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