Current User: Guest Login
Please consider registering

Lost Your Password?

Search Forums:


Minimum search word length is 4 characters – Maximum search word length is 84 characters
Wildcard Usage:
*  matches any number of characters    %  matches exactly one character

Truncating Extra Section?

Reply to Post Add a New Topic

11:40 am
October 2, 2008



posts 5

I'm using an extra section to show a breakout of querystring variations since a lot of our site content is displayed through a single script. Right now that entails me bumping the ExtraTrackedRowsLimit to a whopping 150000, which seems like a bad idea. I tried using MaxNbOfExtra1 and MinHitExtra1 to try to truncate how much goes through, but changing them didn't seem to have any effect on how large ExtraTrackedRowsLimit needed to be.

I don't intend to have any other extra sections handle this large a request, and I really only need to see the top 50 or so. I was hoping there was a way of truncating what it had to work with in a meaningful manner. My impression from reading is that it's important to keep it at a reasonable level like the default 500.

That said, I'm making an assumption about what ExtraTrackedRowsLimit is limiting. It says that it "limits the number of possible rows an ExtraSection can report", so I assume that means it doesn't have anything to do with how many it has to sift through before reporting.

11:55 am
October 2, 2008



posts 1125

ExtraTrackedRowsLimit  is the maximum number of rows for an extra section in AWStats database files (the .txt files). That you finally display 10 or 1000 rows does not change the number of rows AWStats needs to maintain in its database.

If you have about 150 000 rows, your AWStats processing will get slower. As you said, it is not a good idea. It is often possible to optimize the regexp in the extra section in order to get less possible values, thus less rows in the database.

12:22 pm
October 2, 2008



posts 5

Thanks, it didn't occur to me to change the regexp. I'll have to consult with my users to find out what details they can live without, but I'm sure we can whittle it down.

Interestingly, I didn't notice a processing time increase when I added the extrasection and the 150k rows. I've been reprocessing the same 9 month batch every time I push out a change for my users to view, and it was taking about 2-3 hours consistently with DNSLookup set to 2. Setting it to 1 killed my time, though, but it warned about that in the config file. I'll be looking at replacing that with the geoip/geoipfree plugin later today.

Reply to Post

Reply to Topic:
Truncating Extra Section?

Guest Name (Required):

Guest Email (Required):

NOTE: New Posts are subject to administrator approval before being displayed

Confused Cool Cry Embarassed Frown Kiss Laugh Smile Surprised Wink Yell
Post New Reply

Guest URL (required)

Math Required!
What is the sum of:
1 + 11

About the Forum

Forum Timezone: UTC 1

Most Users Ever Online: 302

Currently Online:
7 Guests

Currently Browsing this Topic:
1 Guest

Forum Stats:

Groups: 2
Forums: 9
Topics: 639
Posts: 2710


There are 257 Members
There have been 304 Guests

There is 1 Admin
There is 1 Moderator

Top Posters:

cssfsu – 55
deepakgupta – 34
albert_newton – 30
cosminpana – 20
DTNMike – 19
ahtshun83 – 17

Recent New Members: raju, todd2taylor, sbdcunha, mansigill1987, ThomasDuh, ThomasKic

Administrators: Jean-Luc (1125 Posts)

Moderators: Jean-Luc (1125 Posts)