Perhaps this is a fluke, but if not, something is seriously wrong with
the system.
I'm looking at the lotw stats at http://www.arrl.org/logbook-queue-status
2012-12-14 11:02:10 28,382 8,932,232 3,874,028,579 2012-12-04
16:13:53
(9d 18h 48m 17s ago)
2012-12-14 10:02:27 28,37
I wish you guys would quitcherbitchin about LOTW.give em a chance to fix
the problem.don't sit there and criticize something that is allowing you
to get DXCC confirmations in lightning speed compared to 10 years
agotake off your "computer expert" hat and let the league's staff deal
wit
Has the league become a dictatorship now?
Last I checked I voted in elections a month ago... We aren't just
customers of ARRL, we ARE ARRL and if we don't like how things are
going, we have a right to demand change.
73
Ryan, N2RJ
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Charlie Wooten NF4A wrote:
>
>
Barry,
The reported backlog is simply the time between upload of the last
processed file and the reporting epoch. It is a backward looking
statistic and not predictive.
If you want predictive, look at the number of QSOs in the queue
- which continues to increase - and apply an value for proce
Go to the LOTW site and read carefully. There is a discussion that
tells, in part, that new hardware is on order, and is expected to arrive
in 6-8 weeks. THEY ARE WORKING ON IT!!! RELAX!!! Constantly getting
your shorts all in a wad is uncomfortable, and bad for your health. It
raises yo
Go to the LOTW site and read carefully. There is a discussion that
tells, in part, that new hardware is on order, and is expected to
arrive in 6-8 weeks. THEY ARE WORKING ON IT!!!
That is if you *believe* the claim that the hardware will fix it.
With a very large database, decreases in throu
On 12/14/2012 11:24 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
Go to the LOTW site and read carefully. There is a discussion that
tells, in part, that new hardware is on order, and is expected to
arrive in 6-8 weeks. THEY ARE WORKING ON IT!!!
That is if you *believe* the claim that the hardware will fix it
Insist on transparency from ARRL. I have a problem believing
a solution presented as the only option by the same IT department
that allowed LotW to run out of disk space and crash.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 12/14/2012 12:31 PM, Mike(W5UC) & Kathy (K5MWH) wrote:
On 12/14/2012 11:24 AM, Joe S
OK, great idea, and then what? If we believe that the present IT dept
isn't being truthful with us, why should we expect that our 'insisting"
will change anything?
Quite sometime ago I suggested to my director that LoTW be shut down for
as long as necessary to achieve a long term solution. I
Remember the days when you mailed in cards to the league and it took
3 months. to process?
I'll take 10 days over that anytime.
It used to take 6 years to get your cards back from Box 88. Now I
see even our Russian friends are on LOTW. And I had my PT0S 160 Qso
confirmed in days.
LOTW
> LOTW even at 20 days is a tremendous tool.
I'm not concerned about 20 days for a confirmation. My concern is
20 days (or more) even before the initial transaction is processed
and I get confirmation that the QSOs are safely in the database.
I'm confident they'll figure this out, it's proba
All of us on this reflector are painfully aware that LoTW has a
problem, Additionally we all have seen this discussion go on ad
nausium. All of us are concerned about the problem. None of this is new
NEWS. So far I have told you nothing new. The complaining goes on &
on, and accomplishes
On 12/15/2012 Donald Greenbaum wrote:
> I don't understand the angst over a backlog of processing data during
> the end of the year rush. Unless the world really is going to end in
> a week like the Mayans predicted.
> 73
> Don
> N1DG
Partly because those of us who have been watching have
Might want to consider creating a filter for the thread? Maybe filter
out any messages with LoTW in the subject field ;)
73, Mike, K2CD
Mike(W5UC) & Kathy (K5MWH) wrote:
All of us on this reflector are painfully aware that LoTW has a
problem, Additionally we all have seen this discussion
SO, please let me ask; what do the complainers expect to accomplish
by continuing to kick this horse?
How about getting others involved in *doing something* about the
problem? Since the ARRL IT department seems to want to bury its
head in the sand and claims a new storage system will magical
Every transaction-oriented software system has a performance bottleneck that
limits its throughput. Eliminating that bottleneck -- either by improving
the software or upgrading the hardware -- always reveals the next
bottleneck.
The ARRL has determined that LotW's throughput is limited by the rat
Message-
From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 4:18 PM
To: w...@suddenlink.net
Cc: Dx-Chat
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] LOTW cannot possibly catch up
> SO, please let me ask; what do the complainers expect to accomplish
>
e required cost ... SO
PROBLEM SOLVED !! 73, W2CF
Richard T. Schweizer
377 Canterbury Dr.
Ramsey, NJ 07446
Telephone: (201) 825-4318
> From: wn3...@verizon.net
> To: dx-chat@njdxa.org
> Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] LOTW cannot possibly catch up
> Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 18:56:42
No Ryan, the League is not a dictatorship.
To answer more generically, and not specifically to you (or just you):
However: If you want change, and are not happy with the current situation with
the Logbook server... kvetching about it on this reflector will not accomplish
anything. And I th
That's correct, Ron. You complain about it to your division director,
who will speak on your behalf.
But there's nothing wrong with discussing it here, IMO. Maybe they DO
read things here... I work in web technology for a living, and you
know what? Sometimes I do go searching the web for things t
20 matches
Mail list logo
