Compared to vendor-provided data, Transaction Log Analysis (TLA) can provide unique benefits to a library in analyzing database usage. Meanwhile, it also requires librarians to have a broad knowledge of Information Technology in order to implement a TLA. This article will present an in-house database system developed at the University of Manitoba Libraries to analyze EZProxy’s Starting Point Uniform Resource Locator logs. The database visits that happened in the past two years have been imported into this system and are split into two categories, on-campus and off-campus visits. Unique statistical information from each category is also discussed.
Baker, G., & Read, E. J. (2008). Vendor‐supplied usage data for electronic resources: a survey of academic libraries. Learned Publishing, 21(1), 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1087/095315108X247276
Blecic, D., Fiscella, J., & Wiberley, S. (2001). The measurement of use of Web-based information resources: An early look at vendor-supplied data. College & Research Libraries, 62(5), 434–453. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.62.5.434
Blecic, D., Fiscella, J., & Wiberley, S. (2007). Measurement of Use of Electronic Resources: Advances in Use Statistics and Innovations in Resource Functionality. College & Research Libraries, 68(1), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.68.1.26
Coombs, K. A. (2005). Lessons learned from analyzing library database usage data. Library Hi Tech, 23(4), 598–609. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378830510636373
COUNTER. (2019). What is COUNTER? Retrieved July 25, 2019, from https://www.projectcounter.org/about/
Duy, J., & Vaughan, L. (2003). Usage data for electronic resources: A comparison between locally collected and vendor-provided statistics. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 29(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-1333(02)00400-7
Gonzales, B. M. (2018). Analyzing EZproxy SPU Logs Using Python Data Analysis Tools. Code4Lib Journal, (42).
Liu, G., & Fu, P. (2018). Shared Next Generation ILSs and Academic Library Consortia: Trends, Opportunities and Challenges. International Journal of Librarianship (IJoL), 3(2), 53–71. https://doi.org/10.23974/ijol.2018.vol3.2.94
NISO. (2019). SUSHI History/Origins. Retrieved July 25, 2019, from https://www.niso.org/standards-committees/sushi/historyorigins
OCLC. (2018a). LogSPU. Retrieved from https://help.oclc.org/Library_Management/EZproxy/Configure_resources/LogSPU
OCLC. (2018b). Starting point URLs and config.txt.
OCLC. (2019). Log files overview. Retrieved July 24, 2019, from https://help.oclc.org/Library_Management/EZproxy/Manage_EZproxy/Log_files_overview
OED, O. (2019). database, n. Retrieved from www.oed.com/view/Entry/47411
Peters, T. A. (1993). The history and development of transaction log analysis. Library Hi Tech, 11(2), 41–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb047884
Shibboleth. (2019). Shibboleth. Retrieved July 25, 2019, from https://www.shibboleth.net
Wan, G., & Liu, Z. (2010). Knowing your users: The value of article database usage analysis. Learned Publishing, 23(3), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1087/20100305
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and the initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).