Comments on: Server log analysis

By: steph

steph — Sun, 26 Jun 2005 20:58:04 +0000

That’s an amazing amount of features for a free service. They drive me nuts, though — along with sitemeter, as pericat mentioned — because their servers aren’t as instantaneous as they like to advertise, and when they slow down, the tracked pages take ages to load. Statistics really, really need to be kept on the same server as the site.

By: Justine Larbalestier

Justine Larbalestier — Sat, 25 Jun 2005 15:45:29 +0000

I have statcounter and it’s pretty useful. I can certainly always see how a new page is going etc.

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 13:42:27 +0000

All ugliness is necessary. Long live Webalizer! :)

By: steph

steph — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 13:32:17 +0000

Webalizer is unnecessarily ugly.

Good idea about populating the spam-be-gone section that way!

By: pericat

pericat — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 03:54:50 +0000

I like Refer a lot. I use it to populate the spammer-be-gone section of my htaccess, on the theory that spurious linkage comes from the same set of people that run spambot scripts.

My hosting provider has been testing AWStats for the last few months and I greatly prefer it over Webalizer; it stores a much more comprehensive picture. And the colours are nicer, too.

Another point in Refer’s favour, as opposed to sitemeter or the like: Refer’s data is stored locally. The idea of perfect strangers monitoring my traffic kinda squicks me.