Cisco Bug: CSCuq36580 - Traffic growth numbers useless, should be restated as projected growth
Jun 02, 2017
- Cisco MATE Live
Known Affected Releases
Symptom: Traffic growth numbers useless, should be restated as projected growth Conditions: What do we mean when we report on percent growth? Do users want to find which objects have experienced the greatest measured growth over time? If so, trending lines will not help. See screenshot. In this example, traffic(p95) grows from 506 -> 2070. However, the trend line, which is accurate, shows a trend line going from 1 -> 1375. We then report a % growth of 97,573% Is that a meaningful number which users can use? Instead of reporting on actual traffic growth, we report on trending percent growth. But how can a percent have any meaning when the trend line starts near zero? It can't be used to calculate projections, unless you know the initial projected starting point. It would be better to report on slope. And this should be a slope number relative to the aggregation interval. In the example used here, the slope is 1374/6=229Mbps/day. From this, you can project where the traffic will be next week. The reported formula in the example, f(x) = -4315970 + 3.2e-6x, is not very useful. Perhaps we should rename Traffic (P95) Growth as Traffic (P95) Projected Growth and use the slope numbers as reported above. With the units (i.e. Mbps/day.) If we want to maintain growth percentage, then it should be the last measured aggregated value divided by the beginning value. In the example, this growth would be (2070/506-1)*100 = 309%. We should then not calculate nor display a trend line, as trending would not be involved. This value jumps around quite a bit, so that a trending line might give a more reliable statistic. This affects both traffic reports and and hoc reports using % growth measurements. This is a bug and a design flaw. The numbers we report at the moment satisfy no use case and can not be used by customers, neither for trending nor for reporting on observed data.
Bug details contain sensitive information and therefore require a Cisco.com account to be viewed.
Bug Details Include
- Full Description (including symptoms, conditions and workarounds)
- Known Fixed Releases
- Related Community Discussions
- Number of Related Support Cases