20482Re: Need feedback on sawmill.net
- Dec 9, 2008I'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 firstname.lastname@example.org, "David Culbertson"
> 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
> version (7.x) does have a BIG issue: It doesn't provide referrerdirectly
> information for visits / sessions. Here's a reply that I got
> from Sawmill on this issue in August of 2007:Whether
> 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.
> we should use "unique visitors" instead of "visitors" is up in the"unique
> 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
> visitors"; I would call it a the style of the day. But I preferwords.
> "visitors" alone, because I think the implication is that they are
> unique, and it makes the tables look nicer when you use shorter
> 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
> which pretty well segregates session fields from non-session fields,computes
> 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
> other fields during log processing. This is a very good choice insome
> ways (in particular, the log data does not have to be inchronological
> order), but it means that we can't compute sessions like we computeyou
> 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,
> will be able to see "sessions" in the Referrers report, and it willbe
> there by default. Sawmill 8 will ship later this year.wrote:
> 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
> --- In email@example.com, "amitonebit" <amit.ohayon@>
> > 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.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>