One more thing...
the failure report still has something funny going on.

I'm trying to limit the FAILURE and REQUEST report to the last month only.
Works great for the REQUEST report (is less filling) but FAILURE section
isn't complying like I think it should. I'm also trying to ignore the query
strings on the URI, to make the report more concise.

Some relevent settings:
REQUEST On
REQFLOOR -00-01-00d
REQARGSFLOOR 50r
REQCOLS NRD
REQSORTBY REQUESTS
REQINCLUDE pages

# ignore query strings
FILEALIAS *?* $1

FAILURE ON
FAILFLOOR -00-01-00d
FAILCOLS rd
FAILSORTBY REQUESTS
FAILARGSFLOOR 10r




Here is what is shown-- notice I have the query strings still intact in the
URI. OK, I could deal with that I suppose, but also notice that it is
showing me a different query_string option from January and it shouldn't due
to the FLOOR setting above. Or at least I think these two settings should
have mutually excluded this from being reported. Ideas? What am I doing
wrong here? (besides I'm getting probed by some stupid script kiddie wannabe
hacker or stupid MS client)

1.03%Aug/16/07/_vti_bin/owssvr.dll 1.00%Aug/16/07
  /_vti_bin/owssvr.dll?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=6551&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0 0.02%
Aug/15/07  /_vti_bin/owssvr.dll?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=6254&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0
0.01%Aug/16/07
  /_vti_bin/owssvr.dll?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=4518&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0  Aug/ 2/07
  /_vti_bin/owssvr.dll?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=5606&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0  Jan/ 4/07
  /_vti_bin/owssvr.dll?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=4219&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0 1.03%
Aug/16/07/msoffice/cltreq.asp 1.00%Aug/16/07
  /msoffice/cltreq.asp?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=6551&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0 0.02%
Aug/15/07  /msoffice/cltreq.asp?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=6254&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0
0.01%Aug/16/07
  /msoffice/cltreq.asp?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=4518&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0  Aug/ 2/07
  /msoffice/cltreq.asp?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=5606&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0  Jan/ 4/07
  /msoffice/cltreq.asp?UL=1&ACT=4&BUILD=4219&STRMVER=4&CAPREQ=0


On 8/10/07, Aengus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, August 09, 2007 11:12 PM [EDT],
> Kevin Creason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I update the cache files at the end of month when we roll a new log.
> > Our logs are ~1gb a month, so cache significantly helps.
> >
> > I have a wrapper script that I use to regenerate cache files with the
> > new parameters when needed, and update on the first of a month. I was
> > amused with 7day figure when it was working on older log files.
> >
> > Before the cache files, they were just boring independent monthly
> > reports, no history between months. The cache is great, just getting
> > there has been a challenge.
>
> 1G of logs a month will zip to about 50MB (and if it has any effect at all
> on performance, it will probably speed Analog up).
>
> Cache files are fine for maintaining reports that you set up and designed
> originally with "real" data, because then your cache file can be built
> with
> the information that you know you need. If you create your cache file
> before
> you decide what you want to display in the reports, you are likely to have
> already discarded information that you need to make the reports accurate.
>
> 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
> +------------------------------------------------------------------------
>



-- 
-Kevin
Find me in Google Earth: 29.517567 -95.059033
Admit your errors before someone else exaggerates them. - Andrew V. Mason
aych tee tee pee colon slash slash texascreasons dot homedns dot org
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  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
+------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to