I installed ELOG on a Linux server (CentOS 5.2) and a WinXP laptop.

- If I set both servers to non-SSL, I can synchronize with no problems.

- If I set both servers to use SSL, synchronization fails with "Error code: ssl_error_rx_record_too_long" 

- If I set one to ssl and the other non-ssl, synchronization fails with "Remote server is not an ELOG server"

Is anyone synchronizing or mirroring two ELOG servers with SSL? When either or both servers are set to use SSL, I can use either site. but I can't synchronize.

Thanks

Synchronization with SSL does not yet work. I have to find some time to implement it. Since you are already the second one mentioning this, it slipped higher on my to-do list  

 Thanks! I got rid of the quotes around everything, and it works now.

ben

Hi,

after setting

Date format = %Y-%m-%e

in elogd.cfg,

elogd hangs and must be restarted manually. Can anybody help me?

Thanks,

Steve

 I found my mistake:It must be

Date format = %Y-%m-%d

Steve

Hello,

i have problems with importing csv files. What i want to do is the following:

Import a list of log entries from a csv file with another date like the actual date

I tried to do this but the only thing which happend was that all the entries have the actual date in elog. Then i created a seperate Date column in the csv file an tried to import this.

It worked but in the default date column i have the import date and in a second date column i have the date from the csv file.

Is there a chance to get the csv column imported in the standard Date field? 

Or is there a possibility to hide/supress the default date field and only display the imported date field?

Thanks

Michael

Hi, All.  We have been successfully using ELOG in a limited deployment for a couple years now.  However, we are about to embark on a new project that could run for up to 10 years, and are wondering what sort of scalability we can expect from ELOG.

Are there any problems we can expect to run into as the number of entries grow?  I see in a previous thread that "elog runs fine for a few 10000 entries. At 100000 entries it starts getting slow."  Is this still the case, or have any improvements been made?  What sort of problems would we expect to run into?  Any examples of existing large deployments would be very useful.

Many thanks,

Devin 

The above made statement is not true any more. Mainly due to the large CERN experiments, some speed improvements have been made in late 2007. So elog runs fine at least up to 100000 entries. The startup time might be a bit slow, since it parses all entries there, but beyond the maybe 20s startup time, there is not a big difference when browsing entries. The only peoblem left is if you try to search some text through 100000 entries, this could be a bit slow. I have not tried anhything beyond 100000 entries, because this was not requested so far. If logooks become too big, the entreis could be split into several logbooks. Even if there are several logbooks with 100000 entries each, the access time should not be slower than if there would be one logbook with 100000 entries.