Groups > comp.graphics.apps.gnuplot > #263

Re: Stacked boxes

From	sfeam <sfeam@users.sourceforge.net>
Newsgroups	comp.graphics.apps.gnuplot
Subject	Re: Stacked boxes
Followup-To	comp.graphics.apps.gnuplot
Date	2011-04-14 15:59 -0700
Organization	gnuplot development team
Message-ID	<io7u88$1v7$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<4da3355c$0$12295$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com> <invdk4$11m$1@dont-email.me> <4da344aa$0$5610$c3e8da3$10cdda79@news.astraweb.com> <io7na7$hti$1@dont-email.me> <4da76754$0$9266$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>

Followups directed to: comp.graphics.apps.gnuplot

Show all headers | View raw

Mike Rhodes wrote:

> On 4/14/2011 5:00 PM, sfeam wrote:
>>
>> After thinking about what would need to be added to gnuplot to produce
>> the plot you ask for, I have decided that it is possible already with a
>> slight change to the input data format.
>> 
>> As I understand it, your data above consists of 3 entries
>>   Time(midpoint)   height   Time(width)
>> 
>> If you split each line into records instead:
>>   Time(start)  height
>>   Time(end)   -height
>> 
>> then the following command produces the plot you want:
>> 
>>   plot 'data' using 1:2 smooth cumulative with steps
>> 
>> output is here:   http://tinyurl.com/3nncaet
> 
> So close! Just two questions: 

Hey! no fair moving the goalposts :-)

> what to do with flows with zero length (e.g. UDP traffic), 

I don't know; you tell me.  What do you want it to look like?

> and is there anything along the lines of "fs solid" for steps?

No, not currently.
There was another request for such a thing recently in a different context.
In that case, as I recall, the desired plot could be drawn another way.
Maybe your case is an example that really would require a new plot mode.

> Thanks,
> Mike

Back to comp.graphics.apps.gnuplot | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Stacked boxes Mike Rhodes <M8R-1cd059@mailinator.com> - 2011-04-11 13:07 -0400
  Re: Stacked boxes sfeam <sfeam@users.sourceforge.net> - 2011-04-11 10:26 -0700
    Re: Stacked boxes Mike Rhodes <M8R-1cd059@mailinator.com> - 2011-04-11 14:12 -0400
      Re: Stacked boxes sfeam <sfeam@users.sourceforge.net> - 2011-04-11 17:41 -0700
        Re: Stacked boxes Mike Rhodes <M8R-1cd059@mailinator.com> - 2011-04-11 20:48 -0400
          Re: Stacked boxes Mike Rhodes <M8R-1cd059@mailinator.com> - 2011-04-13 16:06 -0400
            Re: Stacked boxes sfeam <sfeam@users.sourceforge.net> - 2011-04-13 15:07 -0700
              Re: Stacked boxes James Waldby <not@valid.invalid> - 2011-04-14 00:12 +0000
                Re: Stacked boxes sfeam <sfeam@users.sourceforge.net> - 2011-04-14 08:57 -0700
                Re: Stacked boxes Mike Rhodes <M8R-1cd059@mailinator.com> - 2011-04-14 13:03 -0400
      Re: Stacked boxes sfeam <sfeam@users.sourceforge.net> - 2011-04-14 14:00 -0700
        Re: Stacked boxes Mike Rhodes <M8R-1cd059@mailinator.com> - 2011-04-14 17:29 -0400
          Re: Stacked boxes sfeam <sfeam@users.sourceforge.net> - 2011-04-14 15:59 -0700
            Re: Stacked boxes Mike Rhodes <M8R-1cd059@mailinator.com> - 2011-04-14 21:56 -0400

csiph-web