This discussion has been locked. The information referenced herein may be inaccurate due to age, software updates, or external references.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a similar question you can start a new discussion in this forum.

hrStorageSize reports incorrect value

ALL of my hard disks are being reported inside of orion incorrectly. The file sizes are all completely off. I have narrowed the problem down to the way that orion preforms the math on hrStorageSize MIB. Here is the response I have received from solarwinds on what orion is doing with those MIB's.

HOST-RESOURCES-MIB
StorageAllocationUnits
1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4
X by hrStorageSize / by 1024

HOST-RESOURCES-MIB
hrStorageSize
1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5
X by StorageAllotUnits / by 1024

The problem is that the graphs are only dividing by 1024 once. When they really should be dividing my 1024 3 or 4 times. I have a 5.45TB volume that orion reports as a 5.99TB volume. Here is why it is being reported as 5.99TB.

MIB 1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5 = 1463516927

MIB 1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4 = 4096

1463516927 * 4096 = 5994565332992 bytes

5994565332992 bytes / 1024 = 5854067708 kilobytes

5854067708 kilobytes / 1024 = 5716862 megabytes

5716862 megabytes / 1024 = 5582 gigabytes

5582 gigabytes / 1024 = 5.45 terabytes

It seems orion is taking the bytes value and doing something strange with it to get 5.99TB. I'm not sure what is going on with it behind the scenes. But as you can see, if orion were preforming the math correctly the values scaling up to terabytes would be correct.

Other than creating a universal device poller and preforming all this math on the values through custom transforms, is there anything someone can suggest I can do to get orion's default storage pollers to report the correct values?

  • Hi khor,

    For storage decimal byte multipliers are used, binary is used for memory. The conversion factor should be 1000, not 1024.

    Andy

  • Then why do the techs at solarwinds report hrStorageSize being divided by 1024?

    HOST-RESOURCES-MIB
    StorageAllocationUnits
    1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4
    X by hrStorageSize / by 1024

    HOST-RESOURCES-MIB
    hrStorageSize
    1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5
    X by StorageAllotUnits / by 1024

    The above info is directly from them.

    Also, I'm not even sure if your answer helped me at all. I'm trying to find out WHY orion is reporting my storage volumes as being incorrect.. AND how I can fix it. You can't tell me that orion is correct because it's not. Windows itself reports my volumes as 5.45TB. Cacti (when I used it) reported my volumes as 5.45TB. Why isn't orion?

  • Hi hkor,

    It is a very common mistake to use 1024 for storage and memory both. It may be possible that those other tools are using 1024. Using 1024 does yield the 5.45 TB number so I have no doubt they are doing it that way. I'll double check with dev and PM on this and get back to you.

    Andy

  • It's not just other tools. No one seems to be reading what I'm saying. WINDOWS ITSELF reports 5.45TB. Whatever orion says, if it doesn't even match what the operating system says.. its WRONG.

     

    EDIT: Here, maybe some pictures will illustrate better what I am dealing with.

    Do you guys see now? 5.9946TB does not equal 5.45TB. 684.283GB free space does not equal 637GB. I can't trust this software when it reports INCORRECT values.

  • Hi khor,

    Good news - I talked to the PM for NPM and we are switching over to the 1024 standard. Work to make this change is already underway but we can't share a release date with you now.

    Andy

  • Has this been fixed yet? I see you are now on version 9.5.1 but I don't see anything related to this in the release notes.

    If you guys haven't fixed it yet, then what do you suggest I can do to fix this myself as a workaround.

  • well, I can say that I am running 9.5.1 and it is calculating it correctly, its dividing GB by 2^30, at least in the graph with the Volumes above 80% utilization.

    As this graph would also include memory (virtual and physical) I am not sure how it would handle that...

  • What amazes me is how no one has figured this out in previous versions that all the HD and memory sizes were wrong?

  • Anyone from Solarwinds want to chime in on this?

  • This has been brought up before in thwack multiple times... it's not a new argument.  If you think about it this same kind of Meg = 1024 or 1000 fight has been going on with disk manufacturers for over a decade.  Sounds like the concensus is 1024 in upcoming version.