Excel may send chills down the spine of us when we hear users talking about its [ab]use, but it has its place in the toolset. For my money, it is a very good tool for knocking out graphs which look decent. Of course, rrdtool is my geek tool of choice for dynamic long-term graphing, but when doing scratch PoC work, I normally fall back to Excel.

One thing which has frustrated me over time is, well, time, and Excel’s handling thereof. How many times (these puns are getting tiresome already) have you seen an axis like this and gnashed your teeth?

This post expands on one I made last year here about sampling frequency (of I/O throughput, but it’s a generic concept). The background to this is my analysis of the performance and capacity of our data warehouse on Oracle 11g.

Before I get too boring, here’s the fun bit:

Pork Pies per Hour (PP/h)

Jim wants to enter a championship pork-pie eating competition. He’s timed himself practising and over the course of an hour he eats four pork pies. So we might say that his Pork Pies per Hour (PP/h) rate is 4.

I’ve added two new toys to my geek arsenal today. First is one with which I’ve dabbled before, but struggled to master. The second is a revelation to me and which I discovered courtesy of twitter.

rrdtool

rrdtool is a data collection and graphing tool which I’ve been aware of for a while. I wanted to use it when I wrote about Collecting OBIEE systems management data with JMX, but couldn’t get it to work. I’ll not lie to you - it is a bitch to work with at first. Or put a more polite way, it has a steep learning curve. But when you reach the top of the curve and realise its potential…wow. You’ll soon understand why it is so widely used. I plan to write this up soon, but it let me draw nice graphs like this:

Introduction

This is the second part of three detailed articles making up a mini-series about OBIEE monitoring. It demonstrates how to capture OBIEE performance information, and optionally graph it out and serve it through an auto-updating webpage.

This article takes data that part one showed you how to collect into a tab-separated file that looks something like this:

[sourcecode] 2010-11-29-14:48:18 1 0 11 0 3 2 1 676 340 0 53 1 0 41 0 3 0 2010-11-29-14:49:18 1 0 11 0 3 2 1 676 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 2010-11-29-14:50:18 2 0 16 1 4 3 1 679 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 2010-11-29-14:51:18 2 2 19 1 4 3 1 679 32 0 53 1 0 58 0 4 0 2010-11-29-14:52:18 2 1 19 1 4 3 4 682 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 2010-11-29-14:53:18 2 1 19 1 4 3 4 682 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 2010-11-29-14:54:18 2 0 19 1 4 3 1 682 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 [/sourcecode]

Jeff Atwood of Coding Horror fame observed:

This is sage advice (if a little crude :-)) to bear in mind when building reports for users.

In the following list, which two mind-mapping programs are rated best?

Now look at the actual numbers, and answer again

Different answer?

I can’t be the only one in this frantic world whose eyes are drawn to the pictures instead of words and leap to conclusions. It’s only because I use FreeMind and was surprised it scored so low …. and then realised it hadn’t. Looks like the HTML rendering isn’t the same here (FF3.6) as when the web page author wrote it.