httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Hartill <hart...@ooo.lanl.gov>
Subject Re: Logging of ErrorDocument responses (was Re: hmmm...)
Date Wed, 19 Apr 1995 20:33:03 GMT

Brian says...

> > What about the other error/problem redirects, and regular redirects ?
> > should we not log those too ?
> > 
> > Is it also redundant to log
> >    /missing
> > when I know that   /missing/  is almost sure to follow a second
> > later ?
> 
> No, because you *aren't* sure.  

You can be 100% sure for the first example I gave.

> They are two separate processes, two separate
> requests.  In this situation there is one response and *two* log file
> entries, which is completely new and not clearly correct.  One request, one

You say "not clearly correct" which is a long way
from "clearly not correct".

Logging 2 request (or however many it takes) is not going to break
anything. NCSA 1.4 will do the same I believe.

If someone asks for X, and X tells them (directly or by some error/problem)
to go to Y, then I'd like to see both X and Y logged.  Let's see the
complete picture. I might want to know how many times Y is used 
in a day, it doesn't have to be redirected to only by X, so I can't
assume that a count of redirected Xs gives me a count of the Ys.

Ignoring Y in the log file is small price to pay if you dislike them.

> If this stands it needs to be documented clearly, so
> people can modify their current log file tools to account for it. 

or not as the case may be. I'll leave mine alone. I see cases where
the redirect amounts to two separate requests, one which may have failed
and one which succeeded.

> Whatever, if I'm the only one who thinks this is a problem, I'll shut up, 
> and I admit it is a little late in the game to bring this up.  Can we 
> have a show of hands?  What do those not directly involved in coding this 
> think?

my hands are hidden.


robh


Mime
View raw message