With such a small user base, you could probably get the information you are
asking for by running Analog for each user. But I think if we did that our
employees would voice some privacy concerns, even though the material on
the intranet is all work-related.
"Chuck Schick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I wanted to do for some clients is to just put the Analog
> output into a directory for each week and using ASP they could
> select the weekly report they wanted to view.
How do you plan to name these weekly reports? It's a purely cosmetic
issue,
Aengus:
What I wanted to do for some clients is to just put the Analog output into a
directory for each week and using ASP they could select the weekly report
they wanted to view. When you say run a daily report, do you mean just
append to the older reports.
Chuck Schick
Warp 8, Inc.
303-421-51
From: "Chuck Schick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> We do commercial web hosting and I want to Automate running analog so
that
> it will run for each domain and put the output in unique folders for
each
> domain. I understand that this can be readily be done by setting up a
> config file for each domain.
The way that I do automated reports are as follows:
Apache logs it's information into the
/www//logs/access/--access.log using piped log's
into the cronolog application using the following directive for each virtual
host.
CustomLog "|/usr/local/sbin/cronolog
/www//logs/access/%Y-%b-access.log" c
Wow..i have tried i too...with just a small s at the andits
runningbut
now there is at least one open question...
analog doesn`t read my old logfiles since i added teh new formatline..is
there a special rating
in the liens ? Must i pick the lines you send me at the top of the two
old
From: "Aengus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "Carsten Böttcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The admin had added a new field at the end of the fileformat...
> > (you can see the IP)
> >
> > 195.206.128.91 - - [13/Mar/2002:09:50:00 +0100] "GET
> > /spots/sevenone/demo/airmarin/anfang176x144.gif HTTP/1
"Carsten Böttcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The admin had added a new field at the end of the fileformat...(you
> can see the IP)
>
> 195.206.128.91 - - [13/Mar/2002:09:50:00 +0100] "GET
> /spots/sevenone/demo/airmarin/anfang176x144.gif HTTP/1.0" 200 10103
> 217.160.73.138 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (c
We do commercial web hosting and I want to Automate running analog so that
it will run for each domain and put the output in unique folders for each
domain. I understand that this can be readily be done by setting up a
config file for each domain. My initial experiment will be on a Windows NT
se
Sorry for boring you again...
I'm analysing log files of an Intranet Site and so I'm interested in statistics about
a few number of files requested (the interesting files are less than 100) by a few
number of users (15).
Is possible to obtain a report that links together these elements? Or a r
Dear Aengus,
You helped me very much with your information. I have fixed the problem
with my logfile-format.
But now i have a little new one.
The old format i send to you is not the aktuell one.
The admin had added a new field at the end of the fileformat...(you can
see the IP)
195.206.128.
"Dirk Enzmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here are examples of the logfile after its first change (the LOGFORMAT
> cannot read the second element, for example 62.29.33.47, that previously
> was only "-"). Maybe I can ignore it, but I don't know how to do this
> via the LOGFORMAT:
%j means junk
"Dirk Enzmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here are examples of the logfile after its first change (the LOGFORMAT
> cannot read the second element, for example 62.29.33.47, that previously
> was only "-"). Maybe I can ignore it, but I don't know how to do this
> via the LOGFORMAT:
%j means junk
"Bruce Bradbury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Our request report shows 6000 requests for a particular (pdf) file.
> Does that really mean that 6000 people have tried to download it?
Requests for PDF files are often partial requests - this will depend on
your server, but from what I understand, m
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, d.brodale wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Stephen Turner"
> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 6:42 AM
>
>
> : BROWSUMEXCLUDE doesn't remove browsers. It removes
> : _lines from the Browser Summary_.
>
> Gotcha. I am still making silly mistakes with the
> dis
15 matches
Mail list logo
