Good morning Mr Webstatics. Have you overslept?

[#1]

@Penny 

It appears that webstatistics were not delivered this morning. I am hoping that this can be corrected as soon as possible.

Maybe the webstat watcher is having a lie in!

[#2]

Just to add that I've also not seen my webstats/logfiles for 19th January either

The last logfiles were received 19/01/2023 circa 0400 hours containing data for 18th January.

[#3]

Data for 19th apparently arrived early PM, thank you

Although I do get the feeling that it's probably a bit 'light' so to speak and the logfile did also include a selection of data from the previous day's data for 18th as well. Not all of the data. Just a random selection of various accesses from throughout the day. Most (if not all) of these appear to be duplicate entries but even if they had in fact have all been data missing from the previous day's logfile, they would still have been ignored due to data from very much later in the day having already been delivered and processed. All very strange really and with no obvious plausible reason behind it ... but par for the course I guess

[#4]

Thanks @mikeb for the reply.

Mine seem to have arrived, but I haven't thus far noted anything odd about them except for the lateness. But I assumed that Mr Webstatistics was out late the the previous night!

I did wonder whether @Penny had also lost her webstats too.

[#5]

---

@kaspencer wrote:

I did wonder whether @Penny had also lost her webstats too.

---

Webstats arrived somewhere after 1pm yesterday, and at about half three this morning (each set of stats for the preceding day).

As @mikeb commented, the stats for 19/01 seem a bit 'light' - both days, actually, show far fewer page accesses than usual - eg 1.18% and 1.43% of the month's total, respectively (where closer to 5% for each might have been expected, given we're 20 days in).

Don't have time to wade through the logs (sorry), just got a lot else on right now.  Hopefully whatever was wrong has been sorted and the stats will return to normal tomorrow : )

.

[#6]

This is what I received ...

[quote]
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:02:12:10 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:03:04:03 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:08:09:46 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:09:29:23 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:12:16:06 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:12:25:01 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:13:30:51 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:16:00:28 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:20:29:31 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:22:52:27 +0000] "GET ...
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [18/Jan/2023:22:52:28 +0000] "GET ...

[ first access dated 19th ]
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [19/Jan/2023:02:18:26 +0000] "GET ...

[ lots more dated 19th here but probably not enough ! ]

xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [19/Jan/2023:20:07:21 +0000] "GET ...
[ last access dated 19th ]
[/quote]

... somewhere around 30% of data entries for the 18th were included with the data for the 19th. Definitely not all data for 18th and definitely spread out across the day so VERY strange indeed 😕 Why only some data and a random sample across the day at that ? I think it does kinda suggest that not all data is being accounted for properly over this period though.

As Penny says, data for 18th/20th may also be a tad 'light' as well but it's difficult for me to make a reasonable accusation based on the data in my logfiles due to some 'unusual' activity that was going on in any case which has distorted the figures somewhat.

[#7]

Thanks @mikeb & @Penny 

.. mine were probably down as I hadn't had a figure close to what I finaly received since New Years Day, and one might expect a lower figure than usual on that day anyway.

Anyway, like all PlusNet customers, I'm grateful for anything I receive!

KAS

[#8]

@kaspencer - Just out of morbid curiosity because every time I see your name pop up on here there is but one thought that crosses my mind: Are you the KAS who's the proud owner of a massive organ ...

... HOWEVER, before a passing Mod or anyone else for that matter gets 'offended', we're talking about a particularly fine looking virtual pipe organ here and most definitely NOT whatever highly dubious thoughts you might have been having

It's not important so please don't feel compelled to respond either way if at all, it's only my curiosity getting the better of me ... so probably just as well I'm not a cat and all that !

[#9]

@mikeb Yes indeed it is I!

I have built two such "Virtual Pipe Organs" for myself one in 2006-7, (dubbed OPUS I), and one completed in 2020, OPUS II.

I have also partially biult two others for other peolple.

I admit that OPUS II is a very impressive instrument, and probably has to be heard to be believed! I am only a "village organist" myself but quite a number of professional FRCOs have played it.

Here it is, excluding the bench:

There are several videos here: YouTube - See OPUS II 
Thanks for the interest!

Kenneth Spencer

[#10]

I play a bit of keys too (mainly guitar though) I think I'd get lost with all the options on that but it looks amazing. I do love the sound of a pipe organ, this video really piqued my interest last year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeB3JnKp8To the behind the scenes tour is fascinating!