Allen Gilliland wrote: > > > Elias Torres wrote: >> I'm very much for the motivation behind this effort but I think we need >> to think this about it a little bit more. At first I was imagining that >> *both* referrers and hits would be tracked externally, but this proposal >> only solves half my problem. I'd support this if we did both at the same >> time but we left this for 3.2 unless it was absolutely guaranteed you >> could finish it off by the end of the week. > > Asynchronous processing of referrers was implemented a while ago. It is > controlled by these 3 settings in the roller config file ... > > referrers.asyncProcessing.enabled=false > referrers.queue.numWorkers=3 > referrers.queue.sleepTime=10 > > So you would have to enable it, and then you can choose how many threads > run to process the incoming queue and how long each thread should sleep > (in seconds) between runs. Each "run" processes any referrers in the > queue until the queue is empty. > > I'll warn you though, AFAIK it works fine and we used it on > blogs.sun.com for a short while with no real problems, except that the > workers really couldn't keep up with the queue. I think I had the > workers up to around 25 before I decided that it wasn't really worth it > anymore and that what I really wanted was to disable the referrer > processing all together. > > So, if this proposal goes through then you would be able to control both > hit counting and referrer tracking independently of each other. i.e. > enable/disable either or both of them, as well as control a bit how they > work. >
good. In a large installation I don't want to do neither referral or hit count tracking. However, I'm not sure if we can today disable referral and do it externally because don't our queries assume that the table contains raw data as opposed to summarized data? I would think we should rethink our built-in referral think to assume massaged data as in the tagging case for performance and then we can externalize it. Also, not sure if your proposal for *just* dailyhits is enough. Maybe it is for the one sidebar that uses this info today, but I'd think we would like to keep track of a week's or months number of hits. Am I thinking the wrong way? > >> >> BTW, is the task locking work completed? I have a couple of tasks I want >> to develop and I'm dependent on that feature. Please let me know when >> it's ready to be tested. Thanks. > > Yes, it should be working. I still want to do some more testing on it, > but I'd be glad to get some help with that :) You should be able to add > new tasks simply by extending the new RollerTask class and then setting > the right config elements in the config file. > > -- Allen > > >> >> -Elias >> >> Allen Gilliland wrote: >>> I have a new proposal for separating out the hit count tracking from the >>> existing referrer tracking system so that they can each function >>> independently. This would hopefully happen for 3.1. >>> >>> http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_IndependentHitCounts >>> >>> >>> Please take a look at the proposal soon and response with any questions, >>> comments, objections, etc. I plan to begin working on the >>> implementation very soon and would likely try and commit before the end >>> of the week. >>> >>> -- Allen >>> >
