Is an improvement of graphs possible?

Duijv023
Here to help

Is an improvement of graphs possible?

I would like to post a kind of feature request here. Call it "improvement of graphs".

What bothers me is that some graphs are interpolated.
As an example: during a nightly outage of a MG21 (unfortunately,  that happens now and then) one can see network traffic in the graph (that is obviously not here). Now that is quit clear, but it may be a really disturbing thing while troubleshooting a more complicated issue.

This is not only seen on MG graphs but also on other dashboard pages (switches, Accesspoints, MX's). 
 2024-03-12 08_00_25-Cellular Gateways - graph02.png2024-03-12 07_55_54-Cellular Gateways - graph01.png

Besides this issue, regardless the selected time interval, graphs are calculated with the same amount of data. Most Meraki network usage graphs are far from detailed (even not in a 2 hour based interval), and perhaps better said: so undetailed they are almost unusable. 

Graphs can be a great help to see anomalies and other issues, so I hope Meraki will improve the display of graphs to a real helpful level!

For the record: I'm writing this not to be angry or so, but in an attempt to get the Meraki life better for us all.


Greetings from Holland!

Alexander

3 Replies 3
cmr
Kind of a big deal
Kind of a big deal

@Duijv023 it just joins the datapoints with a straight line (apart from latency).  I agree they should be consistent, but personally like the detail.  Would you prefer that they all have a gap (like latency) or a straight line (like the rest)?

If my answer solves your problem please click Accept as Solution so others can benefit from it.
Duijv023
Here to help

Hi,

For me, I would like to see a gap, or else datapoints at 0. 

sungod
Kind of a big deal

Yes, I'd rather see a gap than interpolation.

 

You can use the "Give your feedback" button at the lower right of the dashboard page to make the suggestion (used to be "Make a wish"), it may have better visibility.

 

Get notified when there are additional replies to this discussion.