Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Did anybody try mint?
The thing that is great about Mint is that it does a better job about filtering out hits from Spammers and Bots, but there is a tradeoff with non-javascript users (though I believe that the amount is so minimal that I won’t notice a difference for my site).
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
I’ve been using Mint for a while now. I wrote about it on my site. I think Shaun Inman has tried to address the performance issues ShortStat faced, for example the table is better indexed. There are several high profile sites using Mint right this minute, i’m guessing without issue. Mints home page apparently gets tons of hits a day, and is using Mint.
Last edited by ramanan (2005-11-07 16:30:06)
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
Well it’s bound to if you keep linking to it like that Ramanan. :grin:
SlimStat does a good deal of filtering from the short look I had through the config file. I’m letting bots through at the moment. For spam you can block single IPs and ranges and also specify words within the site name. I’ll let you know how we get on with each other but I definitely haven’t lost $30.00 along the way. ;)
Stuart
In a Time of Universal Deceit
Telling the Truth is Revolutionary.
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
JStubbs,
Thanks for the pointer to Slimstat. Looks useful and provides more than enough insight. After I was going all the way from AwStats over Shortstat via peastat, passing Mint, I think I arrived at last.
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
If anyone is interested in my CSS for SlimStat I’ve made it available on my Weblog. :)
Stuart
In a Time of Universal Deceit
Telling the Truth is Revolutionary.
Offline
#18 2005-11-07 22:13:21
- EddieG5
- Member
- From: Georgia
- Registered: 2004-03-03
- Posts: 96
Re: Did anybody try mint?
Wow. Impressive, Stuart!
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
Btw, one thing I’ve found re Slimstat:
Replacing line #46
$browser = SlimStat::parse_user_agent( $stat["user_agent"] );
in inc.stats.php with that
$browser = SlimStat::parse_user_agent( SlimStat::my_esc( $_SERVER["HTTP_USER_AGENT"]) );
will fulfill the intended reduction of database size while keeping user agent stats. It had not worked otherwise on my site, but entered “Unknown” into the browser detail columns.
Cf. $log_user_agents = false in _config.php.
I already dropped Stephen Wettone an e-mail to let him know.
Last edited by wet (2005-11-08 07:43:27)
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
So what if I have <code>$log_user_agents = true</code>, should I still change it?
Stuart
In a Time of Universal Deceit
Telling the Truth is Revolutionary.
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
> thebombsite wrote:
> So what if I have <code>$log_user_agents = true</code>, should I still change it?
No, it isn’t necessary then. But setting <code>$log_user_agents = false</code> plus this one-liner would reduce database size without negative effect on any features, as far as I can tell based on a two-day experience ;-)
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
Thanks. I’ll give it a go. :)
Stuart
In a Time of Universal Deceit
Telling the Truth is Revolutionary.
Offline
#23 2005-11-08 21:02:30
- alexandra
- Member
- From: Cologne, Germany
- Registered: 2004-04-02
- Posts: 1,370
Re: Did anybody try mint?
Offline
Re: Did anybody try mint?
Damn that site has a nice layout.
Offline