Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 24 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: LOTW  (Read 59227 times)
K4JK
Member

Posts: 297




Ignore
« Reply #45 on: November 08, 2012, 06:51:44 AM »

Here's another update:

http://www.arrl.org/news/logbook-of-the-world-expected-to-be-back-online-on-november-9
Logged

ex W4HFK
NU1O
Member

Posts: 2662




Ignore
« Reply #46 on: November 08, 2012, 08:27:20 AM »

Here is an interesting e-mail: (Highlights are mine)

Quote
A few members have asked about Logbook of the World (LoTW) being
inoperable.  Here are the facts about this situation:

The department manager over Information Technology at HQ has confirmed
that no data were lost.  The problem is that storage capacity has been
filled
. Apparently, the fact that storage for LoTW was rapidly being
filled due to the rapid expansion of data input into it was not caught
in time to allow capacity to be expanded before the program shut down.
Staff advised the directors that capacity is being added and that
appropriate alarms are being built into the program to prevent this
situation from happening in the future.  LoTW should resume full
operations essentially momentarily.

I apologize for the inconvenience this situation has caused.

73,

Jim

Jim Weaver, K8JE
Director, Great Lakes Division

I am in the Financial Services industry so I am no expert when it comes to software or database management.

Can somebody in the field please tell me how one can be unaware that storage capacity was at its limit?  To use a simplistic analogy I know when a CD, DVD, or my Hard Drive is nearing its capacity and I expand capacity when I'm nearing the limit. 

Shouldn't a DB manager know he/she is about to run out of storage capacity?

73,

Chris/NU1O
Logged
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 790


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #47 on: November 08, 2012, 08:38:22 AM »


Can somebody in the field please tell me how one can be unaware that storage capacity was at its limit?  To use a simplistic analogy I know when a CD, DVD, or my Hard Drive is nearing its capacity and I expand capacity when I'm nearing the limit. 

Shouldn't a DB manager know he/she is about to run out of storage capacity?
Chris/NU1O


I am not sure how they missed that one, but it is good that they admitted it!  My guess is that the monitoring software failed...  I can't imagine the ARRL not monitoring disk space.  We used to have a pair of machines monitoring our sites, (three TV stations), if one monitoring system failed, the other should catch the failed monitor, and/or failed web site, or vice-versa. 

My guess is that the ARRL had one system monitoring the LoTW server, and it failed at some time in the past, prior to the disk full problem...  Although someone mentioned that the slowdown should have been a sign, and it should have been, it was missed... 

Beyond the above, I have no clue how the ARRL missed a full disk, assuming that is what it was. 

I am just glad there is no data loss, and I am happy as heck the ARRL is now providing timely updates...  Of course this is all speculation with almost no data, so it is probably way off base...

73's
Dave
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
W4VKU
Member

Posts: 347




Ignore
« Reply #48 on: November 08, 2012, 10:35:55 AM »

You assume there was a paid DB manager involved?
Logged
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 790


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #49 on: November 08, 2012, 11:11:09 AM »

You assume there was a paid DB manager involved?

I do...  Hope I am right!
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
KF6ABU
Member

Posts: 351




Ignore
« Reply #50 on: November 08, 2012, 11:50:09 AM »

my guess is back ups have been failing and not truncating transaction logs.
Logged
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 790


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #51 on: November 08, 2012, 01:25:41 PM »

my guess is back ups have been failing and not truncating transaction logs.

Given that there was no loss of data, my guess is backups have been working, and something else blowed up...

73's
Dave
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
AD9DX
Member

Posts: 1481




Ignore
« Reply #52 on: November 08, 2012, 05:47:24 PM »

my guess is back ups have been failing and not truncating transaction logs.

Given that there was no loss of data, my guess is backups have been working, and something else blowed up...

73's
Dave


I have it on good authority that a mouse chewed through a critical  cable in their einac. The real problem came when someone insisted that cloth covered wire had to be used or it just wouldn't work "right"
Logged

EX, KC9TRM, KB9IRZ
NI0C
Member

Posts: 2404




Ignore
« Reply #53 on: November 09, 2012, 05:04:40 AM »

LoTW is back online now, chugging along processing its backlog.  I checked my awards accounts and everything looks okay, except that WPX is still not right.

73,
Chuck  NI0C
Logged
NU1O
Member

Posts: 2662




Ignore
« Reply #54 on: November 09, 2012, 09:09:28 AM »

LoTW is back online now, chugging along processing its backlog.  I checked my awards accounts and everything looks okay, except that WPX is still not right.

73,
Chuck  NI0C


They are still not up to contest QSOs.  My last QSO is from November 2nd and I upload daily.

I hope they learned something from this and changes will be made if needed.  I hope they didn't just apply a Band-Aid to a major wound.

73,

Chris/NU1O
Logged
AB8MA
Member

Posts: 743




Ignore
« Reply #55 on: November 09, 2012, 05:44:48 PM »

I hope they didn't just apply a Band-Aid to a major wound.

73,

Chris/NU1O

Lets hope they fixed something. Down again?

Quote
Fatal error: initializeLOTWDB: -709 - CONNECT: (protocol error): General database error [initializeLOTWDB: -709 - CONNECT: (protocol error)]
Logged
AD9DX
Member

Posts: 1481




Ignore
« Reply #56 on: November 09, 2012, 05:52:22 PM »

I hope they didn't just apply a Band-Aid to a major wound.

73,

Chris/NU1O

Lets hope they fixed something. Down again?

Quote
Fatal error: initializeLOTWDB: -709 - CONNECT: (protocol error): General database error [initializeLOTWDB: -709 - CONNECT: (protocol error)]

After being down all week the eniac shit its pants again.  This is frustrating. 
Logged

EX, KC9TRM, KB9IRZ
NI0C
Member

Posts: 2404




Ignore
« Reply #57 on: November 09, 2012, 06:07:38 PM »

Getting same error message here.  Also, the ARRL Online DXCC Application appears to be down.  I just tried entering a QSL and got a "browser sync error."
Logged
NI0C
Member

Posts: 2404




Ignore
« Reply #58 on: November 09, 2012, 06:44:17 PM »

LoTW seems to be working again, as I just uploaded a new QSO.  I suspect it is receiving heavy usage now.  I'm still waiting for it to process QSO's made on 04 November.

73,
Chuck  NI0C
Logged
NU1O
Member

Posts: 2662




Ignore
« Reply #59 on: November 09, 2012, 11:21:47 PM »

I have read K1ZZ's columns for over 24 years.  According to Dave we members are the League and the League prides itself on transparency and state of the art technology. Is this really true or is it just a nice slogan?

Where is the transparency?  I would like to see a QST article on exactly what kind of software they are using to maintain the LoTW database, what the hardware is that is being used to maintain the database, the annual revenues LoTW generates along with its annual expenses, and the personal working in the the LoTW department along with their qualifications.

As I wrote in a previous post, Database Management is not my field of expertise, so you guys and ladies who are experts in the field should chime in and add what other information ARRL members should be privy to so that members can decide if the proper software and hardware that is being used is sufficient for the job at hand and if they have hired an adequate number of qualified employees.

As I also wrote in another post, although my current month's AMEX bill for LoTW was about $150 I would be willing to pay more if that's what it takes to have a reliable system that doesn't get backlogged after every large contest.

As soon as feasible I feel K1ZZ needs to write a QST column specifically about LoTW which informs us ARRL members the information I outlined above plus the information the experts in the field conclude membership needs to know so we may make an informed judgement as to whether the problems causing these outages and delays need a completely revamped system or whether some short term fixes are sufficient.

All but the most ardent ARRL sycophants should now realize there are big problems with LoTW and the status quo is totally unacceptable.

73,

Chris/NU1O
« Last Edit: November 10, 2012, 12:19:09 AM by NU1O » Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 24 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!