Will this be true tomorrow?
"Richard Everman" <reverman@ka.reg.uci.edu>
Errors-To: secret@www0.cern.ch
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 17:41:08 --100
Message-id: <9402081635.AA11619@ka.reg.uci.edu>
Errors-To: secret@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: "Richard Everman" <reverman@ka.reg.uci.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Will this be true tomorrow?
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Length: 1488
Statement: (hopefully not out of context)
> Rob said:
> I prefer local time, myself, as its extremely rare that someone would
> need to compare stats across time zones
Question:
Will this be true tomorrow? next year? 5 years from now? At the rate
the use of the Internet is growing, will we always (at least in the
foreseeable future) be interested ONLY in local stats? If there is a
good change that as institutuions, companies, etc. become more
global (e.g., the USA-based software company that went to a 24 hour
help line by switching after hours calls to their AU-based site),
shouldn't we also take a global view? How many microseconds does it
take to convert GMT to local time? :-}
LLAP
Richard
reverman@uci.edu
**************************************************************
>From: kevinh@eit.COM (Kevin 'Kev' Hughes)
> Rob said:
>
> > Here's my proposal for a new logfile format:
> >
> > host rfc931 authuser [DD/Mon/YYYY:hh:mm:ss] ``request'' ddd bbbb
>
> > The only remaining thing I haven't changed is to make the timezone GMT.
> > Comments?
>
> I prefer local time, myself, as its extremely rare that someone would
> need to compare stats across time zones and what I usually look for in
> my stats is what local time is best for system changes.
> To put it another way, if it's GMT then every analyzer will either have
> to stick with GMT format (not user-friendly) or convert each log entry's
> timestamp to localtime (a non-portable bit of code).