Re: Reply not working correct, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Jul 22 08:03:28 2009
|
kyle carpenter wrote:
Hi, |
|
Re: Reply not working correct, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Jul 22 08:05:12 2009
|
Stefan Ritt wrote:
|
SQL Database, posted by lance on Thu Sep 2 10:30:14 2010
|
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? |
|
Re: SQL Database, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Sep 15 00:21:10 2010
|
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 |
|
Re: SQL Database, posted by Bill Pier on Thu Sep 23 17:22:43 2010
|
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 |
Checks on datetime seconds field generate warning in IE7, posted by Richard Stamper on Wed Jul 1 17:00:30 2009 
|
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. |
|
Re: Checks on datetime seconds field generate warning in IE7, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Jul 2 08:36:57 2009
|
Richard Stamper wrote:
When adding a log entry containing a datetime field using the IE7 browser a Javascript warning is displayed |
|
Cancelling an Roption selection in Edit., posted by David Pilgram on Thu Jul 2 09:39:40 2009
|
Hi Stefan,
I don't know if anyone else would be interested or need this...
|