> Server logs are great for logging what is happening on your server, but awful for understanding your user base. There is a high correlation between a usage p

> Server logs are great for logging what is happening on your server, but awful for understanding your user base. There is a high correlation between a usage pattern being interesting and likelihood of it making a representative appearance in the logs. Understanding usage patterns shouldn't depend on knowing absolute numbers. Assuming "dumb" content is cached relatively uniformly, the usage patterns itself should be sufficiently inferable from the logs. For the non-dumb content, why would consumption of highly dynamic endpoints have distortive cache utilization at all? To add more, how often high-resolution usage data really translates into actual product improvement? What percentage of sites have that much traffic to justify engineering hours spent on micro-growth-hacking based on this level of data?