Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [webalizer] Old reports are (sometimes) flushed

Expand Messages
  • Kees de Keizer
    ... Setting Incremental yes save the stats info for the current month to a file and that is used again when you generate stats for the same month. I.E. On my
    Message 1 of 19 , Feb 6 4:52 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Alexio Cassani wrote on 06-02-2003:

      > Incremental is off, but I use also RenameLog yes and NewExtension old and
      > I've noticed that every month the log files were renamed correctly.
      > Moreover often the reports are generated without error (I say often because
      > on 9 months of reporting 2 was replaced with newer without data).
      > do you suggest to put incremental = yes instead of no?

      Setting "Incremental yes" save the stats info for the current month
      to a file and that is used again when you generate stats for the same
      month. I.E. On my personal server I generate the stats every hour (to
      get nearly live info) and with the use of the incremental file this is
      done within a minute: http://stats.de-keizer.net/rip/ and also on
      http://stats.de-keizer.net/rip/apache/

      To answer your question: That's what I should do.
      --
      Kees de Keizer NT Administrator T: +31-10-2448344
      Wirehub! part of easynet PGP: 0x24E3770B F: +31-10-2448356
      http://www.wirehub.net/ kees.de.keizer@...
      Now every door is closed to me [Les Miz]
    • Kees de Keizer
      ... From the sample.conf: # If you have dayly rotation on log name, you can change name # after process a file to have less no productive work day # to use
      Message 2 of 19 , Feb 6 4:54 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        PeterBX wrote on 06-02-2003:

        > I am intrigued now...lol
        >
        > I was unaware of this RenameLog command? Is this new and is there
        > an explanation of it and it's use somewhere?

        From the sample.conf:

        # If you have dayly rotation on log name, you can change name
        # after process a file to have less no productive work day
        # to use this option you need to use "HistoryName" and "Incremental"

        # RenameLog yes
        # NewExtension sav

        --
        Kees de Keizer NT Administrator T: +31-10-2448344
        Wirehub! part of easynet PGP: 0x24E3770B F: +31-10-2448356
        http://www.wirehub.net/ kees.de.keizer@...
        I'll be discovered, My life won't ever be the same [Sunset Blvd]
      • Bradford L. Barrett
        ... Incremental mode is for use only when you are rotating logs.. if you are using it against live logs, you can, and usually will, lose data. -- Bradford L.
        Message 3 of 19 , Feb 6 5:00 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Kees de Keizer wrote:

          > Setting "Incremental yes" save the stats info for the current month
          > to a file and that is used again when you generate stats for the same
          > month. I.E. On my personal server I generate the stats every hour (to
          > get nearly live info) and with the use of the incremental file this is
          > done within a minute: http://stats.de-keizer.net/rip/ and also on
          > http://stats.de-keizer.net/rip/apache/

          Incremental mode is for use only when you are rotating logs.. if you are
          using it against live logs, you can, and usually will, lose data.

          --
          Bradford L. Barrett brad@...
          A free electron in a sea of neutrons DoD#1750 KD4NAW

          The only thing Micro$oft has done for society, is make people
          believe that computers are inherently unreliable.
        • Kees de Keizer
          ... I ve been using it the way I described it for more than a year now, and I never experienced any trouble with it. Just once I had a corrupted logfile and
          Message 4 of 19 , Feb 6 6:15 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Bradford L. Barrett wrote on 06-02-2003:

            > > On my personal server I generate the stats every hour (to get
            > > nearly live info) and with the use of the incremental file this
            > > is done within a minute: http://stats.de-keizer.net/rip/
            > Incremental mode is for use only when you are rotating logs.. if
            > you are using it against live logs, you can, and usually will,
            > lose data.

            I've been using it the way I described it for more than a year
            now, and I never experienced any trouble with it. Just once
            I had a corrupted logfile and that was caused by a corrupted
            referrer.
            --
            Kees de Keizer NT Administrator T: +31-10-2448344
            #easynet Nederland PGP: 0x24E3770B F: +31-10-2448356
            http://www.easynet.nl/ kees.de.keizer@...
            We gaan door, maar waarvoor? [Rent]
          • Bradford L. Barrett
            ... And you won t notice any trouble .. the program was designed to be run once a month against a full months worth of logs.. _only_ if you need to rotate
            Message 5 of 19 , Feb 6 6:42 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Kees de Keizer wrote:

              > > Incremental mode is for use only when you are rotating logs.. if
              > > you are using it against live logs, you can, and usually will,
              > > lose data.
              >
              > I've been using it the way I described it for more than a year
              > now, and I never experienced any trouble with it. Just once
              > I had a corrupted logfile and that was caused by a corrupted
              > referrer.

              And you won't notice any 'trouble'.. the program was designed to be run
              once a month against a full months worth of logs.. _only_ if you need to
              rotate more than once a month should you use Incremental mode, and then,
              only against the _rotated_ log file. Depending on site traffic, I have
              seen upwards of 5-10% data loss when trying to run against a live log
              using incremental mode. Nothing will appear out of the ordinary except
              your numbers will be inaccurate, and you generally will never know it.
              If you want to run against live logs, disable incremental mode.

              --
              Bradford L. Barrett brad@...
              A free electron in a sea of neutrons DoD#1750 KD4NAW

              The only thing Micro$oft has done for society, is make people
              believe that computers are inherently unreliable.
            • Kees de Keizer
              ... If I had to use it that way, it s complete useless for me. Our customers don t want info once a month. For our production machines we use a daily run
              Message 6 of 19 , Feb 6 7:45 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                Bradford L. Barrett wrote on 06-02-2003:

                > [Using Incremental mode on live logs]
                > And you won't notice any 'trouble'.. the program was designed to be run
                > once a month against a full months worth of logs.. _only_ if you need to
                > rotate more than once a month should you use Incremental mode, and then,
                > only against the _rotated_ log file.

                If I had to use it that way, it's complete useless for me. Our
                customers don't want info once a month. For our production machines
                we use a daily run around midnight.

                > Depending on site traffic, I have seen upwards of 5-10% data loss
                > when trying to run against a live log using incremental mode.
                > Nothing will appear out of the ordinary except your numbers will
                > be inaccurate, and you generally will never know it.

                There is no way to give accurate data. Whether you use log files
                or a javascript utily on the site. And I don't believe I'm having
                5-10% data loss during the 12-15 minutes webalizer runs each day.

                > If you want to run against live logs, disable incremental mode.

                Thanks for the tip, but that will make it completely useless
                for me and our customers.
                --
                Kees de Keizer NT Administrator T: +31-10-2448344
                #easynet Nederland PGP: 0x24E3770B F: +31-10-2448356
                http://www.easynet.nl/ kees.de.keizer@...
                We take the loads from off the roads [Starlight Express]
              • Stanley Stramel
                I agree! Our customers require that we have near live stats. Bradford, is the loss of data occrring during the Webalizer is running on the live log file and
                Message 7 of 19 , Feb 6 7:56 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  I agree!  Our customers require that we have near live stats.
                   
                  Bradford, is the loss of data occrring during the Webalizer is running on the live log file and it may be dropping records that are being added to the log file during that execution?
                   
                  Stan
                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Kees de Keizer [mailto:kees.de.keizer@...]
                  Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:45 AM
                  To: Bradford L. Barrett
                  Cc: webalizer@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [webalizer] Old reports are (sometimes) flushed

                  Bradford L. Barrett wrote on 06-02-2003:

                  > [Using Incremental mode on live logs]
                  > And you won't notice any 'trouble'.. the program was designed to be run
                  > once a month against a full months worth of logs.. _only_ if you need to
                  > rotate more than once a month should you use Incremental mode, and then,
                  > only against the _rotated_ log file.

                  If I had to use it that way, it's complete useless for me. Our
                  customers don't want info once a month. For our production machines
                  we use a daily run around midnight.

                  > Depending on site traffic, I have seen upwards of 5-10% data loss
                  > when trying to run against a live log using incremental mode.
                  > Nothing will appear out of the ordinary except your numbers will
                  > be inaccurate, and you generally will never know it.

                  There is no way to give accurate data. Whether you use log files
                  or a javascript utily on the site. And I don't believe I'm having
                  5-10% data loss during the 12-15 minutes webalizer runs each day.

                  > If you want to run against live logs, disable incremental mode.

                  Thanks for the tip, but that will make it completely useless
                  for me and our customers.
                  --
                  Kees de Keizer          NT Administrator    T: +31-10-2448344
                  #easynet Nederland      PGP:  0x24E3770B    F: +31-10-2448356
                  http://www.easynet.nl/          kees.de.keizer@...
                  We take the loads from off the roads [Starlight Express]

                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  webalizer-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                  Webalizer homepage: http://www.webalizer.org
                  Webalizer for NT: http://www.medasys-lille.com/webalizer/




                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                • Bradford L. Barrett
                  ... As do I.. actually, I run it twice a day, but _not_ in incremental mode. Data loss will occur otherwise, and the amount will be determined by the amount of
                  Message 8 of 19 , Feb 6 8:03 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > > [Using Incremental mode on live logs]
                    > > And you won't notice any 'trouble'.. the program was designed to be run
                    > > once a month against a full months worth of logs.. _only_ if you need to
                    > > rotate more than once a month should you use Incremental mode, and then,
                    > > only against the _rotated_ log file.
                    >
                    > If I had to use it that way, it's complete useless for me. Our
                    > customers don't want info once a month. For our production machines
                    > we use a daily run around midnight.

                    As do I.. actually, I run it twice a day, but _not_ in incremental mode.
                    Data loss will occur otherwise, and the amount will be determined by the
                    amount of traffic the individual site generates.. small sites may not
                    experience any.. large sites will experience a lot.

                    > There is no way to give accurate data. Whether you use log files
                    > or a javascript utily on the site.

                    Huh?

                    > And I don't believe I'm having 5-10% data loss during the 12-15 minutes
                    > webalizer runs each day.

                    Probably not.. depends on size of the site. The problem is not in the
                    length of time to process, but the handling of timestamps in incremental
                    mode. And you will not notice the loss unless you compare the results
                    to those run the correct way. I've been doing this since 1997, and have
                    done test results with hundreds of sites ranging in size from small
                    mom and pop shops to huge porn sites with many millions of hits a day.
                    Offically, you should never, ever, run against live logs when you are
                    using incremental mode.. to do so means you run the risk of producing
                    inaccurate results, with a greater risk the larger the site is. If you
                    run in incremental mode, you should _only_ process rotated logs.. If
                    you want to run against live logs, then disable incremental mode and
                    run against them as much as you like.

                    > > If you want to run against live logs, disable incremental mode.
                    >
                    > Thanks for the tip, but that will make it completely useless
                    > for me and our customers.

                    I fail to see why.. thosands of ISPs do it every day without a problem.

                    --
                    Bradford L. Barrett brad@...
                    A free electron in a sea of neutrons DoD#1750 KD4NAW

                    The only thing Micro$oft has done for society, is make people
                    believe that computers are inherently unreliable.
                  • Kees de Keizer
                    ... Sorry, but if I had to do it that way, my servers would only be busy with generating stats. Maybe unix machine can handle multiple instances of webalizer
                    Message 9 of 19 , Feb 6 8:24 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Bradford L. Barrett wrote on 06-02-2003:

                      > [Using Incremental mode on live logs]
                      > > > .. the program was designed to be run once a month against
                      > > > a full months worth of logs.. _only_ if you need to rotate
                      > > > more than once a month should you use Incremental mode, and
                      > > > then, only against the _rotated_ log file.
                      > > If I had to use it that way, it's complete useless for me. Our
                      > > customers don't want info once a month. For our production machines
                      > > we use a daily run around midnight.
                      > As do I.. actually, I run it twice a day, but _not_ in incremental mode.
                      > Data loss will occur otherwise, and the amount will be determined by the
                      > amount of traffic the individual site generates.. small sites may not
                      > experience any.. large sites will experience a lot.

                      Sorry, but if I had to do it that way, my servers would only be
                      busy with generating stats. Maybe unix machine can handle multiple
                      instances of webalizer better but on a windows machine the impact
                      of running webalizer is quite high. That's why I run it around
                      mignight on our production machines.

                      > > There is no way to give accurate data. Whether you use log files
                      > > or a javascript utily on the site.
                      > Huh?

                      In this case I was talking about actual site visitors. I.E. proxies
                      do not generate a a log entry when they present the site to a visitor
                      using that proxy.

                      > If you run in incremental mode, you should _only_ process rotated
                      > logs.. If you want to run against live logs, then disable incremental
                      > mode and run against them as much as you like.

                      Ask Bill if he can generate rotated logfiles with a different
                      extension or any other way so they can be easily selected with
                      a wildcard. Since this is not the case you have to run it against
                      a live log file.

                      > > > If you want to run against live logs, disable incremental mode.
                      > > Thanks for the tip, but that will make it completely useless
                      > > for me and our customers.
                      > I fail to see why.. thosands of ISPs do it every day without a
                      > problem.

                      I never said I have a problem. You try to talk me into one.
                      --
                      Kees de Keizer NT Administrator T: +31-10-2448344
                      #easynet Nederland PGP: 0x24E3770B F: +31-10-2448356
                      http://www.easynet.nl/ kees.de.keizer@...
                      Lovers are very special people [Funny Girl]
                    • Bradford L. Barrett
                      ... The limitations of your platform of choice is unfortunate.. however, the implication that it s ok to run against live logs when using incremental mode is
                      Message 10 of 19 , Feb 6 8:55 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > Sorry, but if I had to do it that way, my servers would only be
                        > busy with generating stats. Maybe unix machine can handle multiple
                        > instances of webalizer better but on a windows machine the impact
                        > of running webalizer is quite high. That's why I run it around
                        > mignight on our production machines.

                        The limitations of your platform of choice is unfortunate.. however,
                        the implication that it's ok to run against live logs when using
                        incremental mode is inaccurate, regardless of any justifications
                        you can make.

                        > > > There is no way to give accurate data. Whether you use log files
                        > > > or a javascript utily on the site.
                        > > Huh?
                        >
                        > In this case I was talking about actual site visitors. I.E. proxies
                        > do not generate a a log entry when they present the site to a visitor
                        > using that proxy.

                        The webalizer was designed to give administrators insight into the usage
                        of their servers, in order to provide insight into capacity planning and
                        future direction. If a request is satisified from a proxy instead of
                        hitting the server, that does not impact the analysis of server
                        performance or usage from that standpoint. The program will provide
                        accurate analysis of actual usage in every way with the exception of
                        visit/entry/exit page analysis (as described in the documentation).

                        > > If you run in incremental mode, you should _only_ process rotated
                        > > logs.. If you want to run against live logs, then disable incremental
                        > > mode and run against them as much as you like.
                        >
                        > Ask Bill if he can generate rotated logfiles with a different
                        > extension or any other way so they can be easily selected with
                        > a wildcard. Since this is not the case you have to run it against
                        > a live log file.

                        Again, the limitations of your platform of choice is not justification
                        for giving people the incorrect assumption that it's ok to run against
                        live logs in incremental mode. To do so is a disservice to those users.

                        > > > > If you want to run against live logs, disable incremental mode.
                        > > > Thanks for the tip, but that will make it completely useless
                        > > > for me and our customers.
                        > > I fail to see why.. thosands of ISPs do it every day without a
                        > > problem.
                        >
                        > I never said I have a problem. You try to talk me into one.

                        I took your statement to mean that it is impossible for you to use
                        the program correctly (ie: to do so would "make it completely useless"),
                        which I would view as a problem. Apparently, you don't think so.

                        --
                        Bradford L. Barrett brad@...
                        A free electron in a sea of neutrons DoD#1750 KD4NAW

                        How do you give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt when you
                        know that if you were to throw it in a room with truth, you'd
                        risk a matter/anti-matter explosion? -- Nicholas Petreley IDG
                      • Kees de Keizer
                        ... But not my choice. We have customers who want to write their websites in BASIC. ... If I want to know the traffic to a server, I ll ask our networking
                        Message 11 of 19 , Feb 6 1:59 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Bradford L. Barrett wrote:

                          > > Sorry, but if I had to do it that way, my servers would only be
                          > > busy with generating stats. Maybe unix machine can handle multiple
                          > > instances of webalizer better but on a windows machine the impact
                          > > of running webalizer is quite high. That's why I run it around
                          > > mignight on our production machines.
                          > The limitations of your platform of choice is unfortunate..

                          But not my choice. We have customers who want to write their
                          websites in BASIC.

                          > > > > There is no way to give accurate data. Whether you use log files
                          > > > > or a javascript utily on the site.
                          > > > Huh?
                          > > In this case I was talking about actual site visitors. I.E. proxies
                          > > do not generate a a log entry when they present the site to a visitor
                          > > using that proxy.
                          > The webalizer was designed to give administrators insight into the usage
                          > of their servers, in order to provide insight into capacity planning and
                          > future direction. If a request is satisified from a proxy instead of
                          > hitting the server, that does not impact the analysis of server
                          > performance or usage from that standpoint. The program will provide
                          > accurate analysis of actual usage in every way with the exception of
                          > visit/entry/exit page analysis (as described in the documentation).

                          If I want to know the traffic to a server, I'll ask our networking
                          department for analysis. They can provide better traffic information
                          that webalizer can, because they measure all the traffic. And nowadays
                          webalizer is used very often to provide statistics to customers, so
                          they can see when, what, how and with what their site has been visited.
                          And they won't miss the 0,5% (if it is that much anyhow) in the stats.

                          > Again, the limitations of your platform of choice is not justification
                          > for giving people the incorrect assumption that it's ok to run against
                          > live logs in incremental mode. To do so is a disservice to those users.

                          I give our customers what they want: Site statistics. Our customers know
                          that they are not 100% accurate if it concern page views and visits, due
                          to the use of i.e. proxies. Webalizer is no longer a tool just for the
                          administrators, but is more and more used for site statistics. Why would
                          you else present referrers, user agents and countries? That information
                          has nothing to do with analysis of the performance.

                          > > I never said I have a problem. You try to talk me into one.
                          > I took your statement to mean that it is impossible for you to use
                          > the program correctly (ie: to do so would "make it completely useless"),
                          > which I would view as a problem. Apparently, you don't think so.

                          That's right. I give our customers what they want, and that
                          is site statistics. They only complaint I'll get, is the lack
                          of information about the used operating system. But that is
                          something that won't be a part of webalizer.
                          --
                          Kees de Keizer NT Administrator T: +31-10-2448344
                          #easynet Nederland PGP: 0x24E3770B F: +31-10-2448356
                          http://www.easynet.nl/ kees.de.keizer@...
                        • Bradford L. Barrett
                          ... Because it s already there and it can be reported easily with very little additional overhead. But that is beside the point.. the point is that it is NOT
                          Message 12 of 19 , Feb 6 2:09 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            > I give our customers what they want: Site statistics. Our customers know
                            > that they are not 100% accurate if it concern page views and visits, due
                            > to the use of i.e. proxies. Webalizer is no longer a tool just for the
                            > administrators, but is more and more used for site statistics. Why would
                            > you else present referrers, user agents and countries? That information
                            > has nothing to do with analysis of the performance.

                            Because it's already there and it can be reported easily with very little
                            additional overhead.

                            But that is beside the point.. the point is that it is NOT ok to run
                            against live logs when using incremental mode, regardless of your
                            decision, for whatever reasons, to do so anyway.

                            --
                            Bradford L. Barrett brad@...
                            A free electron in a sea of neutrons DoD#1750 KD4NAW

                            The only thing Micro$oft has done for society, is make people
                            believe that computers are inherently unreliable.
                          • Kees de Keizer
                            ... Maybe you should add that more clearly to the README file. The only about it now is something about preventing same timestamps . -- Kees de Keizer
                            Message 13 of 19 , Feb 6 10:17 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Bradford L. Barrett wrote:

                              > the point is that it is NOT ok to run against live logs when
                              > using incremental mode, regardless of your decision, for
                              > whatever reasons, to do so anyway.

                              Maybe you should add that more clearly to the README file. The
                              only about it now is something about "preventing same timestamps".
                              --
                              Kees de Keizer NT Administrator T: +31-10-2448344
                              #easynet Nederland PGP: 0x24E3770B F: +31-10-2448356
                              http://www.easynet.nl/ kees.de.keizer@...
                            • Josh Kuperman
                              I m very confused about this. From my reading of the documentation, it looks like running against live logs should not be a problem as long as you have a
                              Message 14 of 19 , Feb 7 10:14 AM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I'm very confused about this.

                                From my reading of the documentation, it looks like running against
                                live logs should not be a problem as long as you have a history file
                                keeping copies of the log records so they don't get counted twice. I
                                am started to use webalizer quite a bit for keeping track of both
                                web and proxy (squid) use. In all cases I'm running against live
                                logs. I really need to know what happened yesterday - ideally I'd be
                                processing hourly.

                                So far it is still very unclear to me why the live logs are a
                                problem? I suppose I could force the logs to rotate every day, but I
                                still don't get it. A file is a file, and at least on Unix systems I
                                don't see what the difference is between a live log and an archived
                                log.


                                On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 07:17:08AM +0100, Kees de Keizer wrote:
                                > On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Bradford L. Barrett wrote:
                                >
                                > > the point is that it is NOT ok to run against live logs when
                                > > using incremental mode, regardless of your decision, for
                                > > whatever reasons, to do so anyway.
                                >
                                > Maybe you should add that more clearly to the README file. The
                                > only about it now is something about "preventing same timestamps".

                                --
                                Josh Kuperman
                                josh@...
                              • Bradford L. Barrett
                                ... You don t need incremental mode to run against logs hourly. ... One is being written to while processing, the other isn t. -- Bradford L. Barrett
                                Message 15 of 19 , Feb 7 10:31 AM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  > I really need to know what happened yesterday - ideally I'd be
                                  > processing hourly.

                                  You don't need incremental mode to run against logs hourly.

                                  > I don't see what the difference is between a live log and an archived
                                  > log.

                                  One is being written to while processing, the other isn't.

                                  --
                                  Bradford L. Barrett brad@...
                                  A free electron in a sea of neutrons DoD#1750 KD4NAW

                                  The only thing Micro$oft has done for society, is make people
                                  believe that computers are inherently unreliable.
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.