From: "Jeremy Wadsack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Aengus wrote:
>
> > The second parameter to the LOGFILE command isn't used for the VHOST
> > report, it's simply used as a prefix for the request report (so that
> > youcan tell www.server1.com/index.htm from www.server2.com/index.htm
> > for instance). The VHOST report is generated from the cs-host field
> > in your logfiles.
>
> Just from a usability perspective, Stephen, why not? Users seem to
> expect that a virtual host listed on the LOGFILE command will end up in
> the Virtual Host report. I know you previously have said that the second
> argument to the LOGFILE command is a path-related argument and is not
> strictly virtual-host specific, but why not build the Virtual Host
> report out of the initial request information for all requests that
> match "REGEXP:^http://[^/]+"?
Because the VHost report reports on what's in the cs-host field - the
Directory report already gives you the information you'd get by using your
suggestion (I think!)
Aengus
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the analog-help mailing list. To unsubscribe from this
mailing list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe" in the main BODY OF THE MESSAGE.
List archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/analog-help@lists.isite.net/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
