"You might want to add the "Date and time of last access" (D) and "Date and time of first access" (E) columns to your request report to see if it at least explains what is happening, even if it doesn't allow you to control it"
Excellent idea, thanks. So I tried all columns, unfortunately, none explains it. "There is no secondary sort criterion, and I don't have any desire to add one. It's much more cumbersome than it's worth." I wasn't requesting one, either, just asking where the consistency is in such rankings. To my limited programming knowledge, random behaviour is an unlikely phenomenon in algorithms. "Just to be clear, you are talking about adding a column to each of the time reports that counts the number of unique referrers for the specified time period." No. I am talking about the number of referrALs. That gives you an overall impression of how the "findability" of your site (in search engines, directories etc.) changes in time. And referrals don't have "*lots* of unique entries in most logs", just one each. So they are *unique* in the first place, like requests. Akos +------------------------------------------------------------------------ | TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list: | http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help/unsubscribe.html | | Digest version: http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help-digest/ | Usenet version: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.analog.general | List archives: http://www.analog.cx/docs/mailing.html#listarchives +------------------------------------------------------------------------
