InternetOfficer.com

Hey,  I am trying to add an Extra Section to grab stats for our detail pages..

This is an example of a record in my log file..

This is how I ve my Extra Section..

On running, it returns nothing .. even though I ve those records in my log file.. Wht am i doing wrong here ?

Thanks that helped..

But I get an error like this.. I believe I would have about ~ 1000 values which might be returned and I had MaxNbOfExtra1=500

Should I add a parameter as ExtraTrackedRowsLimit=1000 or so to make this run successfully ?

Error: The number of values found for extra section 1 has grown too large.
> In order prevent awstats from using an excessive amount of memory, the number
> of values is currently limited to 500. Perhaps you should consider
> revising extract parameters for extra section 1. If you are certain you
> want to track such a large data set, you can increase the limit by setting
> ExtraTrackedRowsLimit in your awstats configuration file.

Sweet, that helped as well.. There are 2 other extra sections I need to generate.. If u could help, i would appreciate ..

For a log record like this,

I need an extra section to list out all catalog.label (s) which have catalog.path=featured in their methodURL.

Where do I add the condition for 'catalog.path=featured' in the Extra Section below to be able to do what i want ?

Next, For a log record like this,

I need an extra section to list out all the parameters after /123/results?

So in this case I need a listing of params like

What do I add in the below extra sections so that it lists out the whole line and not just catalog.c parameter ? I want

Hey Jean, so the first one worked great, thanks !!

for the second one, it gave me an error saying 'Error: The number of values found for extra section 3 has grown too large.' even though I had set up ExtraTrackedRowsLimit .

I actually dont need the whole string of parameters.. Let me clarify.. from the string below, catalog.c=Price_Trial&catalog.catalogNa
me=123&catalog.start=0&catalog.searchTe
rms=

I just need values of catalog.c= and catalog.searchTerms=

how do i filter these 2 params out ?

66.249.71.57 – - [21/Sep/2008:23:35:36 00000] “GET /software brandcatalog/portal/opal/details?catalog.label=1TW10TM1Y HTTP/1.1″ 200 7688 “-” “Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2.1; +http://www.google.com/bot.html)”

203.62.217.11 – - [21/Sep/2008:22:41:24 00000] “GET /softwarebrandcatalog/portal/opal/details?catalog.label=1TW10IM0C HTTP/1.0″ 500 611 “-” “Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022)

For log records like above, I want an Extra Section to just show me all hits for pages ending in /softwarebrandcatalog/portal/opal/details?catalog.label

So this would be something like the standard section Top Pages in AWStats- only prob is that over there they show me upto a directory level, eg pages for URLs ending in /softwarebrandcatalog/portal/opal/details

I know the above one would contain what I want as well, but I explicitly want an extra section to show me a total of how many page views were there for /softwarebrandcatalog/portal/opal/details?catalog.label

Any ideas ?

I did.. it generated an empty table..

Below is one example of what I tried.. it didnt work.. I tried several other tihngs too.. Any idea wht i m doing wrong ?

Actually, I tried that too. Didnt work. Moreover, I even tried just putting a single condition like below, but that still doesnt work.. Gives me an error like

” Error: Wrong value of parameter ExtraSectionCondition”

Any idea ?

ok thanks !

Btw, maybe u can help clear one thing for me..

In the Top Pages section, I was seeing something like this,

/software/brandcatalog/portal/opal/details           6139

Then, in an extra section that I had written to display essentially the same thing as above, but to a more granular level (with individual navcode hits), I see a different total count..

Total                                                           5781

Would u know as to why this might be happening since essentially it should be the same ?