Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Raspuns: [ARRL-LOTW] LOTW Slow After CQWW SSB

Expand Messages
  • Beischel
    The system seems to be crumbling. I have noticed issues with LOTW at various times over the past few months. Sometimes uploaded logs are taking more than 16
    Message 1 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      The system seems to be crumbling. I have noticed issues with LOTW at various times over the past few months. Sometimes uploaded logs are taking more than 16 hours to process. This leads to me thinking that maybe the upload failed, so I upload again, only to find a day later that it's a duplicate because the original finally processed.

      At times I look at awards, etc. and it takes forever for the system to respond...as in minutes....or it times out with the LOTW is off the air so to speak error message.

      I don't know if they are running this on some little Dell toy server or what but clearly something is wrong up there.

      Not only is LOTW ssslllloooooowwww but so are responses to the league. I don't get calls and emails returned. I even contacted my director about it and he agrees that the league is not communicating timely with the members. His comment is that the staff is more concerned with bringing out new benefits. Frankly I don't need more "benefits" right now. As a member I need the ARRL to be responsive and it is not happening. Still have emails over a month that I have never received a reply to.

      Sorry to get a bit off topic, but in summary, something is not right with LOTW and Newington right now and needs to be fixed.

      JMHO

      Duffy
      www.wb8nut.com

      --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "ad0dx" <ad0dx@...> wrote:
      >
      > I see that same 'queued for processing' message, but after waiting 8 to 10 hours and not seeing any qso's from the uploaded log, you start to wonder if LOTW lost your log file. If there was a status somewhere indicating 'log file call.tq8 recived at date/time' you would be more confident that the file was not lost by LOTW.
      >
    • Chuck Milam, N9KY
      ... As an IT Guy, I m curious if anyone does know what is under the hood of the LoTW system. -- Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR) N9KY@arrl.net
      Message 2 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:57 AM, Beischel <beischel@...> wrote:

        I don't know if they are running this on some little Dell toy server...

        As an IT Guy, I'm curious if anyone does know what is "under the hood" of the LoTW system. 

        --
        Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
        N9KY@...

      • w8jmf
        24 hamsters an a large bank of VIC-20s. 73, John p.s. - C mon guys that was one HUGE contest.
        Message 3 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          24 hamsters an a large bank of VIC-20s.

          73, John

          p.s. - C'mon guys that was one HUGE contest.

          --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Milam, N9KY" <n9ky@...> wrote:
          > As an IT Guy, I'm curious if anyone does know what is "under the hood" of
          > the LoTW system.
          >
          > --
          > Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
          > N9KY@...
          >
        • KeithH
          I am a short timer in this hobby but have been doing LOTW since the first couple weeks in and it never has been fast. I am not sure what kind of backed they
          Message 4 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            I am a short timer in this hobby but have been doing LOTW since the first couple weeks in and it never has been fast. I am not sure what kind of backed they are using but it has just 43k users and it is this slow. Must be some kind of SQL server 2000 or something.

            In terms of my personal metrics, I have a 18% QSL to QSO ratio which I believe is lame, but with only ~43k people using the system worldwide those are probably pretty good numbers. I use QSL cards to augment otherwise it would take decades to get to any awards above DXCC 100 using LOTW alone.

            Keith
            AG6AZ

            --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "w8jmf" <w8jmf@...> wrote:
            >
            > 24 hamsters an a large bank of VIC-20s.
            >
            > 73, John
            >
            > p.s. - C'mon guys that was one HUGE contest.
            >
            > --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Milam, N9KY" <n9ky@> wrote:
            > > As an IT Guy, I'm curious if anyone does know what is "under the hood" of
            > > the LoTW system.
            > >
            > > --
            > > Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
            > > N9KY@
            > >
            >
          • Chuck Milam, N9KY
            On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, KeithH wrote: ** ... As of this morning, my ratio is 26%. I will admit I help this along by often
            Message 5 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, KeithH <kwheimbold@...> wrote:

              In terms of my personal metrics, I have a 18% QSL to QSO ratio...

              As of this morning, my ratio is 26%.  I will admit I help this along by often specifically seeking to work fellow LoTW users.
               
              --
              Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
              N9KY@...

            • Jerry
              Sorry, it s only 23 hamsters ... the other one is running the ARRL.org ! Jerry  N9AVY ... From: w8jmf Subject: Re: Raspuns: [ARRL-LOTW] LOTW
              Message 6 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Sorry, it's only 23 hamsters ... the other one is running the ARRL.org !

                Jerry  N9AVY

                --- On Tue, 11/1/11, w8jmf <w8jmf@...> wrote:

                From: w8jmf <w8jmf@...>
                Subject: Re: Raspuns: [ARRL-LOTW] LOTW Slow After CQWW SSB
                To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                Date: Tuesday, November 1, 2011, 7:48 AM

                 

                24 hamsters an a large bank of VIC-20s.

                73, John

                p.s. - C'mon guys that was one HUGE contest.

                --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Milam, N9KY" <n9ky@...> wrote:
                > As an IT Guy, I'm curious if anyone does know what is "under the hood" of
                > the LoTW system.
                >
                > --
                > Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
                > N9KY@...
                >

              • w8jmf
                I m at 46% - Love to see more folks aboard, but that s really not bad. Things are still coming in from years back. 73, John
                Message 7 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  I'm at 46% - Love to see more folks aboard, but that's really not bad.
                  Things are still coming in from years back.

                  73, John

                  --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Milam, N9KY" <n9ky@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, KeithH <kwheimbold@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > **
                  > > In terms of my personal metrics, I have a 18% QSL to QSO ratio...
                  > >
                  >
                  > As of this morning, my ratio is 26%. I will admit I help this along by
                  > often specifically seeking to work fellow LoTW users.
                  >
                  > --
                  > Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
                  > N9KY@...
                  >
                • Rick Scott
                  Im close to 45% on mine.  Pretty good return if you ask me. ... From: w8jmf Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: RATIO To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                  Message 8 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Im close to 45% on mine.  Pretty good return if you ask me.


                    --- On Tue, 11/1/11, w8jmf <w8jmf@...> wrote:

                    From: w8jmf <w8jmf@...>
                    Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: RATIO
                    To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                    Date: Tuesday, November 1, 2011, 7:45 AM

                     

                    I'm at 46% - Love to see more folks aboard, but that's really not bad.
                    Things are still coming in from years back.

                    73, John

                    --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Milam, N9KY" <n9ky@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, KeithH <kwheimbold@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > **
                    > > In terms of my personal metrics, I have a 18% QSL to QSO ratio...
                    > >
                    >
                    > As of this morning, my ratio is 26%. I will admit I help this along by
                    > often specifically seeking to work fellow LoTW users.
                    >
                    > --
                    > Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
                    > N9KY@...
                    >

                  • Ken Anderson, N0AS
                    Mine is 42%. Before I took up RTTY three months ago, it was about 25%. My RTTY contacts have QSLed at better than 80%. Ken Amateur Radio Callsign: N0AS
                    Message 9 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Mine is 42%. Before I took up RTTY three months ago, it was about 25%. My RTTY contacts have QSLed at better than 80%.

                      Ken
                      Amateur Radio Callsign: N0AS

                      Irritating nearly everyone since 1956.

                      ARRL: arrl.org
                      Twin City DX Association: tcdxa.org
                      INDEXA: indexa.org
                      FISTS: fists.org

                      On Nov 1, 2011, at 9:45 AM, "w8jmf" <w8jmf@...> wrote:

                       

                      I'm at 46% - Love to see more folks aboard, but that's really not bad.
                      Things are still coming in from years back.

                      73, John

                      --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Milam, N9KY" <n9ky@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, KeithH <kwheimbold@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > **
                      > > In terms of my personal metrics, I have a 18% QSL to QSO ratio...
                      > >
                      >
                      > As of this morning, my ratio is 26%. I will admit I help this along by
                      > often specifically seeking to work fellow LoTW users.
                      >
                      > --
                      > Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
                      > N9KY@...
                      >

                    • iain macdonnell - N6ML
                      My rates are: Phone 38%, CW 50%, RTTY 65%... overall 50%... from 35k QSOs since 2007. ~iain / N6ML
                      Message 10 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        My rates are: Phone 38%, CW 50%, RTTY 65%... overall 50%... from 35k
                        QSOs since 2007.

                        ~iain / N6ML



                        On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Ken Anderson, N0AS <n0as.dx@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Mine is 42%. Before I took up RTTY three months ago, it was about 25%. My RTTY contacts have QSLed at better than 80%.
                        >
                        > Ken
                        > Amateur Radio Callsign: N0AS
                        > Irritating nearly everyone since 1956.
                        > ARRL: arrl.org
                        > Twin City DX Association: tcdxa.org
                        > INDEXA: indexa.org
                        > FISTS: fists.org
                        > On Nov 1, 2011, at 9:45 AM, "w8jmf" <w8jmf@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > I'm at 46% - Love to see more folks aboard, but that's really not bad.
                        > Things are still coming in from years back.
                        >
                        > 73, John
                        >
                        > --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Milam, N9KY" <n9ky@...> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, KeithH <kwheimbold@...> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > **
                        > > > In terms of my personal metrics, I have a 18% QSL to QSO ratio...
                        > > >
                        > >
                        > > As of this morning, my ratio is 26%. I will admit I help this along by
                        > > often specifically seeking to work fellow LoTW users.
                        > >
                        > > --
                        > > Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
                        > > N9KY@...
                        > >
                        >
                        >
                      • Peter Laws
                        ... For others, this is definitely the way to go. If you are a League member, find out who your Div Dir is (SM s don t sit on the Board) and let him/her know
                        Message 11 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 06:57, Beischel <beischel@...> wrote:

                          > Not only is LOTW ssslllloooooowwww but so are responses to the league. I don't get calls and emails returned. I even contacted my director about it and he agrees that the league is not communicating timely with the members. His comment is that the staff is more concerned with bringing out new benefits. Frankly I don't need more "benefits" right now. As a member I need the ARRL to be responsive and it is not happening. Still have emails over a month that I have never received a reply to.


                          For others, this is definitely the way to go. If you are a League
                          member, find out who your Div Dir is (SM's don't sit on the Board) and
                          let him/her know that LOTW is in need of help before it collapses. My
                          Div Dir is well aware of my opinion of LOTW and the ARRL website
                          fiasco.

                          Of course, we may end up with a "new and improved" LOTW similar to the
                          now-useless website at a cost of ... well, we don't know 'cause HQ
                          isn't telling. :-)

                          Nonetheless, contacting your Division leadership is the only way to
                          force change on Newington.


                          --
                          Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
                        • john_kw9w
                          Chuck, That answer may be a well kept secret. Congrats on your new call, BTW, it s catchy!
                          Message 12 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Chuck,

                            That answer may be a well kept secret. Congrats on your new call, BTW, it's catchy!

                            --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Milam, N9KY" <n9ky@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:57 AM, Beischel <beischel@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > > **
                            > >
                            > > I don't know if they are running this on some little Dell toy server...
                            > >
                            > As an IT Guy, I'm curious if anyone does know what is "under the hood" of
                            > the LoTW system.
                            >
                            > --
                            > Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
                            > N9KY@...
                            >
                          • Chuck Milam, N9KY
                            On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:02 PM, john_kw9w wrote: ** ... If so, then I have to say that s the wrong answer. I m a fan of open development and
                            Message 13 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:02 PM, john_kw9w <kw9w@...> wrote:

                              That answer may be a well kept secret.

                              If so, then I have to say that's the "wrong answer."  I'm a fan of open development and letting people know just what is "behind the curtain."  That way there's less chance for people to assume things are somehow wrong or not on the up-and-up.  I know not everyone agrees with this position, especially in the IT field. 

                              Also, from a simple intellectual curiosity perspective, I'd be interested to know how the system was engineered, and how the designers came to make their decisions.

                              Congrats on your new call, BTW, it's catchy!

                              Thanks!  I'm hoping it's going to be a lot easier to understand on the other side of the pileups.  All those "Foxtrots" in the last call never carried through very well.

                              --
                              Chuck Milam, N9KY (ex-KF9FR)
                              N9KY@...

                            • n5in_ron
                              Yes there should be an indication in Logbook Web Account Menu Your Activity to show that your uploaded log is queued for processing. Currently it only shows
                              Message 14 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Yes there should be an indication in Logbook Web Account Menu > Your Activity to show that your uploaded log is queued for processing. Currently it only shows if an uploaded log has completed processing.

                                This could prevent duplicate uploads on a system which is obviously overtaxed currently.

                                I uploaded my 1,000 CQWWPh Q's about 30 hours ago and there are no results as yet.

                                I might upload them again at the 48 hour mark..although I probably shouldn't.

                                Ron, AE5E

                                (1 dash and 8 dots..as short a 4 character CW call as you can get in the USA, only EE5E would be shorter..but I would have to move to Spain!)
                              • Peter Laws
                                ... That page was unavailable at all until this morning. There needs to be an item on the front page after login that either tells how many logs are in the
                                Message 15 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 13:44, n5in_ron <ron_n5in@...> wrote:

                                  > Yes there should be an indication in Logbook Web Account Menu > Your Activity to show that your uploaded log is queued for processing.  Currently it only shows if an uploaded log has completed processing.

                                  That page was unavailable at all until this morning. There needs to
                                  be an item on the front page after login that either tells how many
                                  logs are in the hopper total or, preferably, tells you where your log
                                  is in said hopper. I'd even settle for an item that said "your last
                                  log received at ..." so that there is positive acknowledgement from
                                  the system that your log is waiting for the hamster to do his work.
                                  Yes, the client spits back a message that the system told it that
                                  everything was OK, but I want to see something from the system
                                  directly.


                                  > I might upload them again at the 48 hour mark..although I probably shouldn't.

                                  Please don't.


                                  --
                                  Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
                                • Wes
                                  Great idea, Peter. Plus it would be nice to get them to accept digital files for submittals for DXCC too, which slows the processing time by a large margin. I
                                  Message 16 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Great idea, Peter. Plus it would be nice to get them to accept digital files for submittals for DXCC too, which slows the processing time by a large margin.

                                    I uploaded 11 Qs yesterday morning and none were processed this morning when LoTW was up and working. Now LoTW is down again. Keeps going up and down every few hours.

                                    73 de k4Wes

                                    --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, Peter Laws <plaws0@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 06:57, Beischel <beischel@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > > Not only is LOTW ssslllloooooowwww but so are responses to the league. I don't get calls and emails returned. I even contacted my director about it and he agrees that the league is not communicating timely with the members. His comment is that the staff is more concerned with bringing out new benefits. Frankly I don't need more "benefits" right now. As a member I need the ARRL to be responsive and it is not happening. Still have emails over a month that I have never received a reply to.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > For others, this is definitely the way to go. If you are a League
                                    > member, find out who your Div Dir is (SM's don't sit on the Board) and
                                    > let him/her know that LOTW is in need of help before it collapses. My
                                    > Div Dir is well aware of my opinion of LOTW and the ARRL website
                                    > fiasco.
                                    >
                                    > Of course, we may end up with a "new and improved" LOTW similar to the
                                    > now-useless website at a cost of ... well, we don't know 'cause HQ
                                    > isn't telling. :-)
                                    >
                                    > Nonetheless, contacting your Division leadership is the only way to
                                    > force change on Newington.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > --
                                    > Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
                                    >
                                  • Peter Jordahl
                                    Unfortunately, EE5E is already taken, by someone who proudly proclaims it as the shortest call! BTW, when DXLab s DXKeeper uploads a file to LOTW. a successful
                                    Message 17 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Unfortunately, EE5E is already taken, by someone who proudly proclaims
                                      it as the shortest call!

                                      BTW, when DXLab's DXKeeper uploads a file to LOTW. a successful upload
                                      is indicated by the response "Your file has been queued for processing"
                                      or similar. Is this NOT the case with other logging programs? I think
                                      we have been spoiled by the normally rapid turn-around into wanting
                                      results NOW!

                                      I don't doubt that the ARRL needs to beef up the LOTW system, but LOTW
                                      has worked extremely well for me as a DX-er and part-time contester,
                                      giving me 5BDXCC with far less expense than cards would have.

                                      73
                                      Pete K5GM

                                      On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 6:44 PM, "n5in_ron" <ron_n5in@...>
                                      wrote:
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Yes there should be an indication in Logbook Web Account Menu > Your
                                      > Activity to show that your uploaded log is queued for processing.
                                      > Currently it only shows if an uploaded log has completed processing.
                                      >
                                      > This could prevent duplicate uploads on a system which is obviously
                                      > overtaxed currently.
                                      >
                                      > I uploaded my 1,000 CQWWPh Q's about 30 hours ago and there are no
                                      > results as yet.
                                      >
                                      > I might upload them again at the 48 hour mark..although I probably
                                      > shouldn't.
                                      >
                                      > Ron, AE5E
                                      >
                                      > (1 dash and 8 dots..as short a 4 character CW call as you can get in the
                                      > USA, only EE5E would be shorter..but I would have to move to Spain!)
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > ------------------------------------
                                      >
                                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      Pete Jordahl, K5GM
                                      k5gm@...
                                    • Peter Laws
                                      ... It s TQSL, called by DX Keeper, that displays that message. I want proof displayed on the website that my file has been queued and, preferably, where it
                                      Message 18 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 16:22, Peter Jordahl <k5gm@...> wrote:

                                        > BTW, when DXLab's DXKeeper uploads a file to LOTW. a successful upload
                                        > is indicated by the response "Your file has been queued for processing"
                                        > or similar.

                                        It's TQSL, called by DX Keeper, that displays that message. I want
                                        proof displayed on the website that my file has been queued and,
                                        preferably, where it is in the queue. If that "can't be done", which
                                        I'm sure someone will claim, then a numerical indication of how many
                                        files are in the queue total would work (though clearly not as well).

                                        Better yet, HQ could re-engineer the system so that there aren't
                                        delays like this.

                                        --
                                        Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
                                      • Mach Myovich
                                        Hasn t there been enough banter about LOTW being slow, etc. Seems like some folks just don t get it and like to see themselves in print. Nufs N Nuf
                                        Message 19 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Hasn't there been enough banter about LOTW being slow,
                                          etc. Seems like some folks just don't get it and like to see themselves in print.
                                          Nufs N Nuf
                                           
                                        • James Rodenkirch
                                          My delete key is wearing off from all of the intense e-mail delete activity as a result of all of this banter...hi hi To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com From:
                                          Message 20 of 24 , Nov 1, 2011
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            My delete key is wearing off from all of the "intense e-mail delete" activity as a result of all of this banter...hi hi

                                             



                                            To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                                            From: k6kap@...
                                            Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:36:49 -0700
                                            Subject: Re: Raspuns: [ARRL-LOTW] LOTW Slow After CQWW SSB

                                             

                                            Hasn't there been enough banter about LOTW being slow,
                                            etc. Seems like some folks just don't get it and like to see themselves in print.
                                            Nufs N Nuf
                                             

                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.