I believe bandmap entries are sent across the network in 10.36 and higher.
Tony, Ve3rz
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcelo" <marcelo@alternex.com.br>
To: <writelog@contesting.com>
Cc: "Gary Ferdinand W2CS" <w2cs@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WriteLog] WL in a M/M Station
>
>
> Hello Gary
>
> We have been using Writelog here in Brazil for some time, on M/M, M/S and
> M/2 setups, at ZW5B and ZX5J. The software works great in network, and
> crash recovery is impressive. So, to your questions:
>
> 1 - There is no central WL server. Each computer keeps a copy of the file
> in it´s local disk. If there is a network problem, the software keeps
> logging separately in each computer. When network is reconnected the
> software automatically synchronizes the logs on the fly.
> A good advice is having a list of things to do in case of failure
> (procedures, internet passwords, etc).
>
>
> 2 - True, as said above, when network is on the logs are always in synch,
> so mult information is always updated.
>
> 3 - There is no WL server. We usually have one extra computer, not
> associated with a logging position for connecting to internet, cluster,
> log browsing (and correction - changes are transmitted through the network
> to all logs, etc).
>
> 4 - The bandmap is not transmitted through the network. I think this is
> something that will appear in future versions. As for information
recovery,
> I am not sure. I don´t remember having a total computer crash. Network
> disconnections are far more common.
>
> 5 - Yes. Aggregate rate (and graphs) is updated in every position.
>
> 6 - I was at PT5A for this CQWW CW where TR was used. I found TR great for
> stand alone CW, but the impression I had is that networking is not so
good.
> The logs are not automatically synchronized, and at every network
> disconnection (we had quite a few) the difference between the logs became
> larger. That was specially troublesome for the spotting station (we had no
> packet / cluster), were we found many supposed multipliers that had
already
> been worked, but were only in the log of the specific band computer. After
> the contest was finished, the logs had to be merged.
> Another problem was the link between the spotting station - a bit apart
> from the main house - and the TR network. You can´t integrat the serial
> network with an ethernet network easily.
> The plus side was the possibility of the spotting station to populate the
> bandmap of the stations. WL doesn´t do that yet.
>
> 7 - I believe ethernet is more RF resistant, but only from empiric
> observation. The great benefit of ethernet is the easy configuration and
> the possibility of easily linking a spotting station via optic cable. (I
> believe this is also great for DX-pedition with several working
locations).
>
> 8 - I think this is no problem.
>
> I hope this helps a little. Comments and different views are more than
welcome.
>
> 73´s
>
> Marcelo, PY1KN / PY2KN
>
>
>
> At 11:37 27/11/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> >Dear WLers,
> >
> >I'm doing some investigation of various loggers that support a M/M
> >configuration. I've only used WL in a limited way so far, single op in
SS,
> >and I'm very impressed. But I've thoroughly perused the excellent
> >documentation available as it pertains to M/M operations and it raises a
few
> >questions.
> >
> >1. The existence of a WL server. I presume this is a requirement when
> >running M/M?
> >
> >2. Recovery after restart. I am intrigued and pleased by the WL design
> >that appears to (re)populate the local log when a position is
(re)started.
> >I believe the implication of this is that every position sees all
QSOs/Mults
> >even if one or more positions had to be restarted during the contest.
True?
> >
> >3. Recovery of the WL server. Can someone please fill me in on how/if
the
> >server can be restarted and recovered? I did not see any details on
this.
> >For example, if the server dies and needs to be restarted (let's say a
> >simple Windoze hang, no hardware breakage)... Meanwhile the positions
> >continue to be able to operate? When the WL server is back up, does it
> >resynch with the local positions like they can resynch with it after they
> >die? I'd appreciate a complete, clear explanation of this scenario. If
> >I've missed it in the doc, just stick my nose in it ;-)
> >
> >4. When a local WL dies and gets restarted, does it come up with the
band
> >map it had when it died, a clean band map, or a band map that has been
> >updated with the events that occurred on the other positions during its
> >restart?
> >
> >5. At any given local position can local rate and aggregate rate be
> >displayed? Or is it just one or the other?
> >
> >6. Can anyone relate operating a M/M or M/2 using WL to doing the same
> >thing with another logger such as TRLog or CT?
> >
> >7. Is the Ethernet any more/less susceptible to RFI than alternative
such
> >as a serial port daisy chain?
> >
> >8. I see port choices of only COM1-4. My system has COM5 and COM6
> >configured. Can WL access these COM ports somehow?
> >
> >Thanks and Happy Thanksgiving to all.
> >
> >73,
> >
> >Gary W2CS
> >Apex, NC
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >WriteLog mailing list
> >WriteLog@contesting.com
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
>
> _______________________________________________
> WriteLog mailing list
> WriteLog@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
|