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

20482Re: Need feedback on sawmill.net

Expand Messages
  • amitonebit
    Dec 9, 2008
      I'm not sure i got it all :)

      So...what they mean is that you can't see how many
      visits (sessions) made from a certain referrer
      or in other words you can't see any other dimension
      like visitor systems (and how many visits each generated)
      or geo location (and visits each location generated)

      ??

      Did i get it right?

      Thanks for your help.



      --- In webanalytics@yahoogroups.com, "David Culbertson"
      <davidsculbertson@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi,
      >
      > I am independent web marketing consultant and I use sawmill for a
      > couple of clients. It has many nice features and seems to be fairly
      > accurate (when compared with other log file analyzers) but the
      current
      > version (7.x) does have a BIG issue: It doesn't provide referrer
      > information for visits / sessions. Here's a reply that I got
      directly
      > from Sawmill on this issue in August of 2007:
      >
      > ====================
      >
      > There indeed to separate concepts here:
      >
      > 1. Sessions (sometimes called "visits")
      > 2. Visitors (sometimes called "unique visitors")
      >
      > Sawmill uses "sessions" and "visitors" to refer to these two.
      Whether
      > we should use "unique visitors" instead of "visitors" is up in the
      > air; the question is whether "visitor" implies uniqueness strongly
      > enough that it can be used alone, or whether the uniqueness
      > implication is weak enough that it must be explicitly added with the
      > word "unique." WebTrends originally used "visitors" for this, as did
      > many other of the original analytics packages (including Sawmill,
      > which first shipped in 1996). Newer packages tend to call them
      "unique
      > visitors"; I would call it a the style of the day. But I prefer
      > "visitors" alone, because I think the implication is that they are
      > unique, and it makes the tables look nicer when you use shorter
      words.
      >
      > As for why we don't include Sessions in the Referrers table as a
      > separate column, well, cough, it's because we can't. Sawmill's
      > internal infrastructure keeps session information in a separate
      table,
      > which pretty well segregates session fields from non-session fields,
      > to the point that it's impossible to add a non-session field to a
      > session report (e.g., "bytes transferred" in the "session users"
      > report), or to add a session field to a non-session report (e.g.,
      > "sessions" to the "referrers" report). Sawmill computes session
      > information on-the-fly as the report is being generated, but
      computes
      > other fields during log processing. This is a very good choice in
      some
      > ways (in particular, the log data does not have to be in
      chronological
      > order), but it means that we can't compute sessions like we compute
      > other fields. The practical effect of this policy is the "session
      > fields and non-session fields don't mix" limitation. This is a basic
      > limitation of Sawmill 7, and there is not really any way around it.
      >
      > However, in Sawmill 8, we have done the huge amount of work required
      > to fundamentally change our reporting and database infrastructure to
      > make session fields analogous to non-session fields. In Sawmill 8,
      you
      > will be able to see "sessions" in the Referrers report, and it will
      be
      > there by default. Sawmill 8 will ship later this year.
      >
      > =========================
      >
      > Sawmill 8 is currently in Alpha. I have not tried it so I don't know
      > if they actually fixed this issue as promised.
      >
      > - Dave Culbertson
      > www.lightbulbinteractive.com
      >
      > --- In webanalytics@yahoogroups.com, "amitonebit" <amit.ohayon@>
      wrote:
      > >
      > > Hi,
      > > We are looking to use some log file analysis tools,
      > > A one that is a real option other than web trends
      > > is sawmill. Any feedbacks on how customizable is it?
      > > how stable and accurate and such..?
      > >
      > > Thanks.
      > >
      >
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic