Log Analysis Tools for Windows? 37
FunkMonkey asks: "I administer a custom web app for my company (unfortunately, it's a Windows-only company -- servers and all), and I've been asked to find a web log analysis tool that our users can use to look at standard stats (number of visits/hits, etc.), as well as the ability to filter by authenticated users (including putting those users into groups). Additionally, the tool must be free or under $100.00, and be able to generate Excel (or Excel-compatible) reports. My app generates ECLF reports, so just about any web log analyzer should be able to read the logs themselves. I see this as a good opportunity to weasel some Open-Source stuff into the company. Any help you can offer -- suggesting apps, tips, forums to which I could post this question, etc. -- would be most welcome. Thanks in advance!"
Analog (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Analog (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Analog (Score:4, Informative)
So I took a look at AWStats and (although slower - it's written in perl not compiled c) it looks to have a lot more useful features.
Usefully though, I came across this comparison chart [sourceforge.net] comparing these three options plus another. Hope this helps.
bjpirt
Webtrends (Score:1)
PHP (Score:4, Funny)
Re:PHP (Score:2, Informative)
First of all; he already has logs. He asked about log analysis, not log creation. If you mean to insert a custom php function into every file dologline() or something, that would be a) slow, b) hard-to-impossible to implement on potentially thousands of files c) incompatable if he is using any other server generated pages. And it would miss static objects, images for example.
If you mean, write your own log parser in PHP, again that would be both slow and painfull. PHP isnt patic
Re:PHP (Score:2)
Re:PHP (Score:2)
PHP is not paticularly good at manipulating text. It is infinitly better then C, or Modula. But compared to gawk, sed... the unix toolkit, let alone Perl, it sucks. The PHP developers know this, and they have wraped up some of espically usefull features of Perl in to PHP functions... Things that Perl treats as natiave opearators. Compare e
Re:PHP (Score:1)
Oh and for the record
Re:PHP (Score:1)
*This post has NOT been proofread (It is late)*
Re:PHP (Score:1)
Re:PHP (Score:2)
>$data = preg_replace("/hello/", "goodby", $data);
>Perl:
>$data =~ s/hello/goodby/;
What the hell does it matter how you *call* the function (aside from the PHP being clearer)? If you want to argue which is better, argue over the *implementation* of the replacing algorithm (which is probably going to be pretty much the same.)
As far as I can recall, the PHP text functionality lies in the compiled C modules, not the top-layer modules written in PHP. I could be wrong.
Re:PHP (Score:2)
PHP may be clearer, but that is because you (obviously) dont know what the =~ opearator does. Which, if you've never seen Perl code before, is quite resonable. Lets say you dont know what + does:
Stupid example language:
$i = add_values($i, 2);
PHP (or Perl, C, Java...):
$i = $i + 2;
or:
$i += 2;
Assuming you dont know what + does, the first example is the most clear. The last ex
Re:PHP (Score:2)
What I am saying is that it's irrelevant how the function is called. Using =~ instead of rx_replace() does not make a language better or worse suited for string manipulation. The algorithm used for the actual manipulation does. If Perl and PHP use the same algorithms, then they are by definition equally good in string processing.
Re:PHP (Score:2)
I don't know about you but $100 won't buy you much of my time.
Analog (Score:5, Interesting)
First, since it's open source, you could add support to export to CSV fairly easily.
Second, Analog can export to what it calls "COMPUTER" output, which is designed for easy parsing. Couple the COMPUTER output with a little Python or PERL, and you'll have a CSV file fairly quickly.
When you're finished looking at Analog, make sure you also consider Report Magic for Analog [reportmagic.org] to make things look pretty in a browser.
Re:Analog (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Analog (Score:1)
err.... um.... (Score:4, Funny)
Hi Slashdot! (Score:4, Funny)
Excel (Score:4, Informative)
eg:
Response.ContentType = "mime-type application/vnd.ms-excel"
Response.AddHeader "content-disposition", "attachment; filename=auto-gen.xls"
You can also do the same to generate M$ Word files - although they dont need a table inside. These files can be opened in M$ Office and OpenOffice.
Mike
awstats (Score:3, Informative)
It's written entirely in perl so it can work on Windows just fine as well. To see a sample go here [homeftp.net].
D'oh. (Score:1)
It's called PERL.
Logs under Windows tend to be very thin... (Score:2)
I'm spoiled with the feedback from Unix-style systems.
That said, if there is a way to improve the volume and quality of what is being logged, I would appreciate hearing about it. (Yes, I've tweaked the default log settings for the system, and have enabled what I can for the apps I find. DR Watson is moderately useful when apps crash.)
Re:Logs under Windows tend to be very thin... (Score:2)
A Microsoft tool for a Microsoft job? (Score:4, Informative)
It doesn't output to
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx
Some of these (Score:5, Informative)
http://awstats.sourceforge.net/
http://www.multicians.org/thvv/webtrax-help.htm
http://www.ftls.org/en/examples/cgi/ewla.shtml
http://www.watchwise.net/
http://www.weblogexpert.com/
For a detailed list of web log analyzers, go to this page. It has listing of various platform specific and platform independent analyzers:
http://www.uu.se/Software/Analyzers/Access-analyz
Absoulte (Score:2, Informative)
WUSAGE is the best, I think... (Score:2, Informative)
*cragen.
Do it yourself (Score:2, Insightful)
Good luck.