Hi,

I love this software. I am not a programmer but have learned alot about the program.

I have 2 questions.   #### This is my modification ####

1. when i do a reply it will bring the original qutes with it but i have the option to change what had been entered. once i do the reply and reply to the reply i can not change the first reply but can change the second reply. This just started last week and i am not sure what has changed. i even uninstalled and reinstalled. If I try to just the HTML i tcomes up with code? If I do elcode seems to do ok just not able to stop the editing of the the last reply. Plain seems to do the same as ELcode.

2. I have also had trouble with E-Log not starting on my XP machines. Any ideas?

Thanks for sharing such a powerful program it is sweet.

Kyle

Sorry but I don't get your point. See I modified your original entry above. Now I will submit this entry, and do another reply. **** And I can modify this ****

We have been running elog for a few years now and its solid. The only thing is we are getting to 140k entries over a few books and its starting to slow down whist searching. My questions is can we go to an SQL type database rather than a flat file? Is it worth it? Is anyone running this type of configuration?

What about using something like MySQLfs to get a db backend transparently to ELOG?  I use ENCFS, (a FUSE backend), currently to achieve encrypted logbooks and it works fine -- ELOG never knows anything other than reading and writing to logbook files.  From what I've read, the MySQLfs backend would work the same, and you likely would gain some of the caching benefits of MySQL, which might help with your read/search times, given the memory requirements of the database of course.

Bill

lance wrote:

We have been running elog for a few years now and its solid. The only thing is we are getting to 140k entries over a few books and its starting to slow down whist searching. My questions is can we go to an SQL type database rather than a flat file? Is it worth it? Is anyone running this type of configuration?

When adding a log entry containing a datetime field using the IE7 browser a Javascript warning is displayed - see the attachment.  This is due to a change in the naming of the "seconds" field of a datetime entry (made in version 2143) not being propagated to the code that generates the Javascript that checks the supplied values.

Suggested patch follows.

Change "s%d" to "c%d" in lines 9675 and 9678.

Showing lines 9675-9680 below, change from:

               rsprintf("  if (document.form1.s%d.value == \"\") {\n", i);
               sprintf(str, loc("Please enter second for attribute '%s'"), attr_list[i]);
               rsprintf("    alert(\"%s\");\n", str);
               rsprintf("    document.form1.s%d.focus();\n", i);
               rsprintf("    return false;\n");
               rsprintf("  }\n");

to:

               rsprintf("  if (document.form1.c%d.value == \"\") {\n", i);
               sprintf(str, loc("Please enter second for attribute '%s'"), attr_list[i]);
               rsprintf("    alert(\"%s\");\n", str);
               rsprintf("    document.form1.c%d.focus();\n", i);
               rsprintf("    return false;\n");
               rsprintf("  }\n");

Regards,

Richard Stamper