On Tuesday, January 31, 2006 6:39 AM [EDT], Alan Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Personally I don't, the statistics are useful so I can prove how much > the site is being used, where the most used pages are etc. The > standard I > ensure is not so much page requests but from performance of the site > as a whole - uptime, page load time etc (which is not got from > analog). Do you look at the Processing Time Report (PROCTIME) at all, and do you use something else because you find it wildly misleading, or because it doesn't give enough detail? > The stats are more useful to me by showing the demographics of where > the accesses come from, how people have found the site (search words > report). The stats are useful, but they are not a bible - more of a > guidance. And in my case, I tend to use Analog for "forensic log analysis" - figuring out the cause of a change, or tracking down a problem or the details behind a trend that the overall reports throw up. (For example, spotting a robot that is leeching data from a shopping site, because a single IP address is generating 1% of all page requests, and 0.00% of all requests, so it's not requesting images, only pages). Aengus +------------------------------------------------------------------------ | TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list: | http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/analog-help | | Analog Documentation: http://analog.cx/docs/Readme.html | List archives: http://www.analog.cx/docs/mailing.html#listarchives | Usenet version: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.analog.general +------------------------------------------------------------------------
