Re: [analog-help] Processing large (>1.95g compressed) logs ...

2001-02-12 Thread Stephen Turner
On Sun, 11 Feb 2001, Chuck Pierce wrote: > well, the first thing you can do is not keep your logs compressed. By > having analog uncompressed the log files eats up a TON of memory. This isn't true. Uncompressing is CPU intensive, but not memory intensive. And analog's own memory usage is the sa

RE: [analog-help] Processing large (>1.95g compressed) logs ...

2001-02-11 Thread Dave Atkins
What are you using to unzip the files? How large are the individual log files? I am using a freeware gzip utility and processing the log files over a network share because I do not have enough room to uncompress my log files. This works amazingly well--far, far better than webtrends. My largest

Re: [analog-help] Processing large (>1.95g compressed) logs ...

2001-02-11 Thread Chuck Pierce
well, the first thing you can do is not keep your logs compressed. By having analog uncompressed the log files eats up a TON of memory. Also, analog is very memory intensive. I would suggest that you check out http://www.analog.cx/docs/lowmem.html. Especially if you are hitting swap. - Chuck