On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 11:39:10PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> My personal web server is lightly loaded (20MB transferred in a busy
> week). But it takes several hours to do all the DNS lookups. I once
> had a power failure during this time which caused my stats to be
> skipped with was a real
On Fri, 12 May 2000, Chris Wagner wrote:
>At 09:23 PM 5/11/00 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
>>it's faster for some things, but i find it really clumsy and difficult
>>to work with. postgres' psql is vastly superior to the mysql admin tool
>>- and from what i hear, psql is supposed to be even better i
On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 02:51:56AM -0700, t s a d i wrote:
> http://www.webtechniques.com/archives/2000/04/perl/
>
> written by Randal Shwartz.
>
> Craig, thanks a lot for the script. would you also (and all other PERL
> experts) take a look at Randal's scripts and maybe tell us what you
> On Sat, May 13, 2000 at 08:16:55PM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
> > Hell, it might even be better to just set up a customlog that writes
> > in table format. Lost data is bad. :)
yep, that's another way to do it - write to a text file and then run a
cron job every half hour or whatever to rotate
>
> WHAT log file? The database table is the "log file" ... there's no
> transferlog on disk in the form of a file. The object of the game (in
> this thread anyway) is to get Apache to write directly to a database.
> You can do that with mod_perl or by piping the log output to a perl
> script th
The "database" is the table of raw data and an index. Apache can be made to
write its log file in the form of a table, via customlog. Why use a pipe
for something that Apache can do nativly? Unless you want up to the second
SQL-ified stats, just run savelog daily to rotate the logs. Now unleash
On Sat, May 13, 2000 at 08:57:50PM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
> At 07:24 PM 5/13/00 -0500, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> >So what happens when you're reading the requests database and Apache
> >wants to write more data? With MySQL, the table is locked and now you
> >just lost data. More often, you wan
At 07:24 PM 5/13/00 -0500, Nathan E Norman wrote:
>So what happens when you're reading the requests database and Apache
>wants to write more data? With MySQL, the table is locked and now you
>just lost data. More often, you want to read data but the writer has
>locked the table. I'd noticed this
On Sat, May 13, 2000 at 08:16:55PM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
> At 10:10 AM 5/12/00 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> >i don't see how. apache just sends the log data out to the pipe, it
> >doesn't wait for the pipe program to commit the record to the database.
> >as far as delaying apache goes, it's p
At 10:10 AM 5/12/00 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
>i don't see how. apache just sends the log data out to the pipe, it
>doesn't wait for the pipe program to commit the record to the database.
>as far as delaying apache goes, it's probably less of a delay than
>writing it to a text file.
I see what y
On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 11:15:06PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> here's a first stab at it. note, it's completely untested and
> might even work. i've used exactly the same database table as in
> Apache::DBILogger, so anything that works with that should also work
> with this.
i've actually bother
On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 11:15:06PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
a couple of obvious mistakes.
> @line = split /:*:/ ;
@line = split /:\*:/ ;
> create the table and index in postgres:
i should have tested the table creation before posting it.
CREATE TABLE requests (
server varch
On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 06:10:29PM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
> For elementary or trivial purposes, MySQL's speed makes it worth it.
> Especially for webstats.
perhaps. it's a matter of preference. i'd rather sacrifice a little
speed and gain a lot in flexibility and reliabilityand gain all
At 09:23 PM 5/11/00 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
>it's faster for some things, but i find it really clumsy and difficult
>to work with. postgres' psql is vastly superior to the mysql admin tool
>- and from what i hear, psql is supposed to be even better in the new
>version 7.
I was only considering
On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 07:23:45PM +0800, Chad A. Adlawan wrote:
> > another way to do it is to write a small perl (or whatever) program
> > which reads apache log entries on stdin and injects them into a database
> > - should be less than 20 lines of perl using DBI.
>
>but the problem is, i c
First, I believe there is a 'free' version of MySQL. -- There is a different
'agreement' that comes with Debian.
Second, MySQL may not be the best but a lot of packages already use it. I have
it on my machine for that reason.
Third, it would be great for SOMEBODY to do a comparison of the CURRENT
> MySQL is faster and I believe easier. I doubt he would need transactions
it ain't easier.
> just to log Web stats.
why use tools that are weaker and non-free when you can use better and
open-source?
and when he'll need better sql server one would have to install another
sql server for that anot
>
> another way to do it is to write a small perl (or whatever) program
> which reads apache log entries on stdin and injects them into a database
> - should be less than 20 lines of perl using DBI.
>
but the problem is, i cant code in PERL :-(
any good souls out there who have the free t
On Wed, May 10, 2000 at 11:35:45AM +0200, Dariush Pietrzak wrote:
> > is there anybody here doing that ?
> > i.e., piping apache logs directly to MySQL ? also, can anyone suggest
> > to me any app w/c converts
> > and puts apache logs in MySQL tables ?
> Well, debian's got it all covered:
>
On Wed, May 10, 2000 at 06:15:27PM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
> At 11:36 AM 5/10/00 +0200, Dariush Pietrzak wrote:
> >btw, why do you choose mysql? it ain't free, it ain't any good
> >try Oracle, Sybase, PostgresSQl,
> >they are ok, and Postgres is free
>
> MySQL is faster and I believe easier.
"Chad A. Adlawan" wrote:
>the reason why i chose MySQL is because its the first RDBMS i have ever
> tried :-) ... i will try PostgreSQL someday. were not considering oracle
> yet because a small group as ours cant afford it :-)
>
Postgres seems very strong on the backend, but it needs
At 11:36 AM 5/10/00 +0200, Dariush Pietrzak wrote:
>btw, why do you choose mysql? it ain't free, it ain't any good
>try Oracle, Sybase, PostgresSQl,
>they are ok, and Postgres is free
MySQL is faster and I believe easier. I doubt he would need transactions
just to log Web stats.
+
> > is there anybody here doing that ?
> > i.e., piping apache logs directly to MySQL ? also, can anyone suggest
> > to me any app w/c converts
> > and puts apache logs in MySQL tables ?
> Well, debian's got it all covered:
>
> Package: libapache-dbilogger-perl
> btw, why do you choose mysql
On Wed, 10 May 2000, Chad A. Adlawan wrote:
> is there anybody here doing that ? i.e., piping apache logs directly to
> MySQL ? also, can anyone suggest to me any app w/c converts and puts apache
> logs in MySQL tables ? i actually tried apachedb from freshmeat already but
> i get an
> Package: libapache-dbilogger-perl
> Version: 0.93-1
> Priority: optional
> Section: interpreters
> Maintainer: Michael Alan Dorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Depends: perl5, libapache-mod-perl, libdbi-perl, libapache-dbi-perl,
> libtimedate-perl
> Architecture: all
> Filename:
> dists/frozen/main/bina
> is there anybody here doing that ?
> i.e., piping apache logs directly to MySQL ? also, can anyone suggest
> to me any app w/c converts
> and puts apache logs in MySQL tables ?
Well, debian's got it all covered:
Package: libapache-dbilogger-perl
Version: 0.93-1
Priority: optional
Section:
hello :-)
is there anybody here doing that ? i.e., piping apache logs directly to
MySQL ? also, can anyone suggest to me any app w/c converts and puts apache
logs in MySQL tables ? i actually tried apachedb from freshmeat already but i
get an "out of memory!" error whenever i try f
27 matches
Mail list logo
