ALCON,
Hello, I am having issues with printmon query results not showing the proper results for "total_pages". The page_printed is always equal to zero (0). Moreover, total_pages value is also not right as when I print 5 pages it is telling only 1. Any solution to that?
One Example Query: (ALL "printmon" Queries give me the same inaccurate results)
Index=wineventlog eventtype=printmon_windows (host=”Printer Name” OR host=”Printer Name”) user=”If looking for specific user info”
| table _time, user, document, machine, printer, driver_name, total-pages, size_bytes
| rename user as “User”, document as “Document”, machine as “Host”, printer as “Location”, driver_name as “Driver”, total_pages as “Total Pages”, size_bytes as “Bytes”
| dedup document
| sort - _time
Other Links about Subject but old info without any solution or fix:
1. WinPrintMon not logging page_printed correctly (24May2015)
2. 1winprintmon search results aren't showing the proper results for "total_pages" (20Feb2019 at 0826)
Please provide example query or where to find the fix.
Yuanliu,
You were correct. During an audit of the PrintMon inputs, we discovered that the system\default configuration on all servers was disabling the necessary inputs on the print server. After modifying and consolidating the inputs from all servers to the print server, the print service\operational log, including Event ID 307 with the "total_pages" field, is now being collected correctly.
Forget all the older posts that do not have answer. So, you are telling fellow Splunk users that you have a Windows source that that outputs 0 in page_printed field when someone printed more than 0 pages on a Windows machine, and when you print 5 pages on that Windows machine, this Windows source gives 1 in total_pages field. Is this correct? Because that is what your sample code would suggest. There is nothing Splunk does in your code to change, or aggregate, or do anything to affect these field values. If all the older posts you linked are like this, no wonder they receive no answer. Because this is not a Splunk question.
I suggest the following:
Yuanliu,
Thanks for the info and I will look into that and respond with my finding.