I've had a little success working around the 2GB memory limit issue with the
32-bit analog.exe for Windows.
After trying to see if I could re-compile Analog with 3GB support, I found
it was possible to directly edit the existing binary using this command:
editbin.exe /LARGEADDRESSAWARE analog.exe
This created a version of analog.exe that can access up to 3GB of memory on
Windows systems that have the /3GB switch enabled.
It's not as good as a full 64-bit version (any progress on that front?), but
it may give some of you a little more breathing room.
I still don't know how to modify the source or compiling parameters for
this, but you can use the command above to achieve the same effect.
I'm happy to send the .exe to anyone who's interested.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Aengus <analog07@eircom.net> wrote:
> Joelle Tegwen <jtegwen@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I realize that I'm asking the choir here, but I'm hoping to get an
> > honest assessment.
> >
> > We're looking for a new log analyzer. The two that consistently came
> > up were AWStats and Analog. Analog seems like a great product, but it
> > seems to be no longer under development. We don't have anyone on staff
> > who could update this so if updates or changes needed to be made, we
> > would be out of luck.
> >
> > Is it worth it to start using Analog now? Are there current open bugs
> > that are a concern? How would we deal with new browsers/OS (like
> > Vista)? Or is this project going away and we should look elsewhere for
> > a log analyzer?
> >
> > Are there other issues I should be aware of?
>
> Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything that I would describe as
> an "open bug". While the current version of Analog was released 4 years ago,
> there haven't really been any significant changes in the Web log landscape
> in that time, except the addition of Windows Vista to the OS report, and
> there are user contributed patches that address that. Presumably someone
> will add Windows 7 in the near future too. A 64-bit compiled version for
> Windows might also be more useful now than it was 4 years ago, but that's a
> prolem with the available tools, rather than with Analog itself. As the
> availability of 64-bit tools for Windows development improves, expet to see
> a user-contributed build of 64-bit Analog for Windows. (64-bit versions for
> other operating systems are already available).
>
> Analog has remained pretty static because the flexibity and customization
> that it offers comes from changes made to config files, not from code
> modifications and recompilation.
>
> Is it worth starting to use Analog now? I'd turn that question around - is
> there any reason not to use Analog? If Analog doesn't deliver on some of
> your needs today, it's probably not going to change significantly at this
> point. On the other hand, if you have a good idea what you want to get from
> your log files, and Analog delivers on those needs, then it's going to keep
> delivering.
>
> Aengus
>
> +------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list:
> | http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/analog-help
> |
> | Analog Documentation: http://analog.cx/docs/Readme.html
> | List archives: http://www.analog.cx/docs/mailing.html#listarchives
> | Usenet version: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.analog.general
> +------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
32-bit analog.exe for Windows.
After trying to see if I could re-compile Analog with 3GB support, I found
it was possible to directly edit the existing binary using this command:
editbin.exe /LARGEADDRESSAWARE analog.exe
This created a version of analog.exe that can access up to 3GB of memory on
Windows systems that have the /3GB switch enabled.
It's not as good as a full 64-bit version (any progress on that front?), but
it may give some of you a little more breathing room.
I still don't know how to modify the source or compiling parameters for
this, but you can use the command above to achieve the same effect.
I'm happy to send the .exe to anyone who's interested.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Aengus <analog07@eircom.net> wrote:
> Joelle Tegwen <jtegwen@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I realize that I'm asking the choir here, but I'm hoping to get an
> > honest assessment.
> >
> > We're looking for a new log analyzer. The two that consistently came
> > up were AWStats and Analog. Analog seems like a great product, but it
> > seems to be no longer under development. We don't have anyone on staff
> > who could update this so if updates or changes needed to be made, we
> > would be out of luck.
> >
> > Is it worth it to start using Analog now? Are there current open bugs
> > that are a concern? How would we deal with new browsers/OS (like
> > Vista)? Or is this project going away and we should look elsewhere for
> > a log analyzer?
> >
> > Are there other issues I should be aware of?
>
> Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything that I would describe as
> an "open bug". While the current version of Analog was released 4 years ago,
> there haven't really been any significant changes in the Web log landscape
> in that time, except the addition of Windows Vista to the OS report, and
> there are user contributed patches that address that. Presumably someone
> will add Windows 7 in the near future too. A 64-bit compiled version for
> Windows might also be more useful now than it was 4 years ago, but that's a
> prolem with the available tools, rather than with Analog itself. As the
> availability of 64-bit tools for Windows development improves, expet to see
> a user-contributed build of 64-bit Analog for Windows. (64-bit versions for
> other operating systems are already available).
>
> Analog has remained pretty static because the flexibity and customization
> that it offers comes from changes made to config files, not from code
> modifications and recompilation.
>
> Is it worth starting to use Analog now? I'd turn that question around - is
> there any reason not to use Analog? If Analog doesn't deliver on some of
> your needs today, it's probably not going to change significantly at this
> point. On the other hand, if you have a good idea what you want to get from
> your log files, and Analog delivers on those needs, then it's going to keep
> delivering.
>
> Aengus
>
> +------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list:
> | http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/analog-help
> |
> | Analog Documentation: http://analog.cx/docs/Readme.html
> | List archives: http://www.analog.cx/docs/mailing.html#listarchives
> | Usenet version: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.analog.general
> +------------------------------------------------------------------------
>