On Sun 06 May 2001 22:42, you wrote:
> Michael Mohr
> UNIX Systems Administrator
> Auckland University of Technology
> Private Bag 92006
> Auckland, NZ
> Tel: (649) 917-9999, ext 8133
> Fax: (649) 917-9901
>
> He he he! What if your users use "gcc" the same time? Will
> compiling
> crash? ;-)
> ====
> If your gcc is properly configured, that condition shouldn't happen.
> Access to certain parts of memory (gcc is memory intensive) requires
> those parts be locked. Ownership of the lock prevents other users
> from accessing it. I have seen conditions where a single user can
> crash gcc by running multiple compiles, but that's an OS issue.
So, analog do not need to worry more than gcc when it crash because
of locking problem. It can even create directories in tmp sufixed with
PID number (e.g. "/tmp/analog2121") or even something number.
<snip>
> be implemented soon or not at all.
> ====
> I agree that UNIQUEIP[{hour}|{day}|{week}|{month}] would be a good
> enhancement. My question is whether it is worth the major change to
> an already very efficient program? You can achieve the same results
> using a Perl script or a UNIX shell script that entails cut, sort,
> grep and wc.
You din't read my previous emails with attention. For this feature
it's best to use already standardized analog input system (e.g. log
format reconizing, log combining etc.) and output system (e.g. plenty
of output formats suitable for human and computer processing).
cut, grep, sort are good when you make some medium jobs. When
there's a need for speed, memory eficiency etc. then make this
thing in C. Not even in Perl!! I know very good that a shell
script (or more better Perl can achieve my goal) but it miss
analog input/output capabilities. And that's not for me, but
for future users which will be pleased, because, I repeat, unique
host is an (artificial and incorect) measure of site traffic ranking.
> My question is whether it is worth the major change ...
Well, so we declare analog closed and only maintained? I hope we
think no. "Major change" - depend by your point of view. If this
feature implies structural changes in analog, yes is a major change,
and from this point developers need to think: will be good to
include this soon or later? But if this new options just enter with
a "if () { }" in analog main processing loop and use for convenience
only 1-3 specific functions, then it's not so major change. I said
this things in a previous email.
kind regards,
--
Claudiu Costin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
| This is the analog-help mailing list. To unsubscribe from this
| mailing list, go to
| http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help/unsubscribe.html
|
| List archives are available at
| http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
| http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help/archives/
| http://www.tallylist.com/archives/index.cfm/mlist.7
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
