| ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
|
68425
|
Mon Sep 12 19:10:03 2016 |
 | Chris Smyth | chris.smyth@comcast.net | Question | Windows | ELOG V2.7.8-229 | Re: Body Width | > How do I make this section Wider or Shorter in the 2.7.8 version?
> Maybe I did something to make it shorter? ELCode shows as a full box but plain txt is very short box.
Never mind Found it
In Global set
Message Width = 95 |
|
68438
|
Sat Oct 1 15:32:53 2016 |
 | Chris Smyth | chris.smyth@comcast.net | Question | Windows | 2.7.1 | Enforcement of password complexity | Is there a way to enforce password complexity for users?
Either in this version of elog or the newest version? |
|
67443
|
Wed Feb 20 21:13:28 2013 |
 | Chris Smith | crms57@yahoo.ca | Question | Windows | ELOG V2.7. | Multiple versions of elog on one server | Is there a way of having multiple copies of elog running on one windows 2003 server? different ports?
I need to access 2 different elogd.cfg files. |
|
67445
|
Wed Feb 20 23:41:00 2013 |
| Chris Smith | crms57@yahoo.ca | Question | Windows | ELOG V2.7. | Re: Multiple versions of elog on one server |
| David Pilgram wrote: |
|
| Chris Smith wrote: |
|
Is there a way of having multiple copies of elog running on one windows 2003 server? different ports?
I need to access 2 different elogd.cfg files.
|
It's probably not of much help, but for a short time I ran two elog daemons on the same linux box, using different ports. It was thus able to run with two separate elogd.cfg files. This is linux, and heavily biased to my eccentric way of running this linux box, but started them as:
/usr/local/sbin/elogd -p 8080 -c /home/logbooks1/elogd1.cfg -d /home/logbooks1
/usr/local/sbin/elogd -p 8081 -c /home/logbooks2/elogd2.cfg -d /home/logbooks2
Do note that as I was the only user on that linux box, I didn't have login etc.
However, I was soon asked questions by Andreas as to how I found this running, as he had encountered problems with an earlier version. To be honest, that stopped me experimenting too far with this at that point, as well as a coincidental upgrading of my hardware.
But I was doing this *not* because I had to run two separate elogd.cfg files, but other reasons which meant splitting into two at that time vastly improved the performance of elog on the linux box at that time. So while I didn't actually enounter any problems in doing so, I only have limited experience - and, of course, absolutely none on running even one [windows equivalent of a daemon] on Windows.
I am assuming here you have good reason for two separate elogd.cfg files, rather than just wanting to run two separate logbooks - guessing here, but one set public (no login) and one set private (with login)?
|
I need to do this because there are 2 different groups that each have 6 or 7 different logbooks in their elogd.cfg files. (and they can't access each others log books)
Currently the first group accesses elog as http:elog.com:8080. The elogd windows service executes "C:\Program FilesELOG\elogd.exe" -D -c "C:\Program Files\ELOG\elogd.cfg"
From what I can tell, whats needed is either some way to get the windows service to run a different config file or there needs to be a way of creating a second elog windows service that points to a different elogd.cfg file. Is there some way of doing this? |
|
67449
|
Thu Feb 21 20:05:44 2013 |
| Chris Smith | crms57@yahoo.ca | Question | Windows | ELOG V2.7. | Re: Multiple versions of elog on one server |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Chris Smith wrote: |
|
| David Pilgram wrote: |
|
| Chris Smith wrote: |
|
Is there a way of having multiple copies of elog running on one windows 2003 server? different ports?
I need to access 2 different elogd.cfg files.
|
It's probably not of much help, but for a short time I ran two elog daemons on the same linux box, using different ports. It was thus able to run with two separate elogd.cfg files. This is linux, and heavily biased to my eccentric way of running this linux box, but started them as:
/usr/local/sbin/elogd -p 8080 -c /home/logbooks1/elogd1.cfg -d /home/logbooks1
/usr/local/sbin/elogd -p 8081 -c /home/logbooks2/elogd2.cfg -d /home/logbooks2
Do note that as I was the only user on that linux box, I didn't have login etc.
However, I was soon asked questions by Andreas as to how I found this running, as he had encountered problems with an earlier version. To be honest, that stopped me experimenting too far with this at that point, as well as a coincidental upgrading of my hardware.
But I was doing this *not* because I had to run two separate elogd.cfg files, but other reasons which meant splitting into two at that time vastly improved the performance of elog on the linux box at that time. So while I didn't actually enounter any problems in doing so, I only have limited experience - and, of course, absolutely none on running even one [windows equivalent of a daemon] on Windows.
I am assuming here you have good reason for two separate elogd.cfg files, rather than just wanting to run two separate logbooks - guessing here, but one set public (no login) and one set private (with login)?
|
I need to do this because there are 2 different groups that each have 6 or 7 different logbooks in their elogd.cfg files. (and they can't access each others log books)
Currently the first group accesses elog as http:elog.com:8080. The elogd windows service executes "C:\Program FilesELOG\elogd.exe" -D -c "C:\Program Files\ELOG\elogd.cfg"
From what I can tell, whats needed is either some way to get the windows service to run a different config file or there needs to be a way of creating a second elog windows service that points to a different elogd.cfg file. Is there some way of doing this?
|
Have you checked the option "Top groups", which was made especially for that case? You can create several independent sets of logbooks not seeing each other.
|
I will check out the "Top Groups". But another question, the documentation says "Prior to ELOG version 2.4.1, one had to run two elogd servers in parallel, listening under different ports." ... how do you set this up? |
|
68794
|
Sat May 5 11:22:50 2018 |
| Chris Rasmussen | chris.rasmussen@cern.ch | Bug report | Linux | 2.9.2 | Re: Elog ID entry bug at >99999 entries | Hi Andreas, I'm working on the same experiment as Joseph who submitted the bug report.
You are right, IDs greater than 10^5 are created no problem. The issue is with the internal elog link, in this case of the form elog:SequencerEvents/XXXXX The link generated uses only the first 5 digits of the message ID, and therefore links to the wrong message. In the two attachments you can see our sequencer event number 100098, first displaying the message where all of the ID is displayed and secondly in "full" view of the elog front page. Here, the "ID" column contains a link with the string: elog:SequencerEvents/10009. Our problem is that we often use this string to paste into other elogs and generate a link to the sequencer event message. However, since the string uses too few digits, we end up with a link to the wrong message
| Andreas Luedeke wrote: |
|
I am not sure I understand your bug report.
I can easily create IDs greater than 100'000 (see attached picture), but that is not your problem, or is it?
Cheers, Andreas
| Joseph McKenna wrote: |
|
We have a possible bug with elog that the ID for an elog entry at over 99,999 entires reads as 10,000...
68792/1 Illistrates the problem, we use this ID often to cross reference from out datalog...
Is this a know bug we can find a fix for? We are using: elogd 2.9.2 built Jul 14 2015, 18:58:06 revision
|
|
|
| Attachment 1: sequencer_event_100098.PNG
|
|
| Attachment 2: sequencer_event_10009X.PNG
|
|
|
68797
|
Mon May 7 18:10:20 2018 |
| Chris Rasmussen | chris.rasmussen@cern.ch | Bug report | Linux | 2.9.2 | Re: Elog ID entry bug at >99999 entries | ah yes, that was a helpful clue. Our elogd.cfg file led me to a .js file which redefines the ID to the elog:SequencerEvents/XXXXX format and it indeed had a silly hard coded length of that string.
Since I am pretty sure this is our code, I think it is safe to say that this is not a bug in the elog
| Andreas Luedeke wrote: |
|
Well, in my example the ID link worked just fine.
There could be a string length limitation, but it could be as well the way you are creating the ID that is the source of the problem: I would need the part of your elogd.cfg that defines how you format your ID in order to try to reproduce your problem.
Cheers, Andreas
| Chris Rasmussen wrote: |
|
Hi Andreas, I'm working on the same experiment as Joseph who submitted the bug report.
You are right, IDs greater than 10^5 are created no problem. The issue is with the internal elog link, in this case of the form elog:SequencerEvents/XXXXX The link generated uses only the first 5 digits of the message ID, and therefore links to the wrong message. In the two attachments you can see our sequencer event number 100098, first displaying the message where all of the ID is displayed and secondly in "full" view of the elog front page. Here, the "ID" column contains a link with the string: elog:SequencerEvents/10009. Our problem is that we often use this string to paste into other elogs and generate a link to the sequencer event message. However, since the string uses too few digits, we end up with a link to the wrong message
| Andreas Luedeke wrote: |
|
I am not sure I understand your bug report.
I can easily create IDs greater than 100'000 (see attached picture), but that is not your problem, or is it?
Cheers, Andreas
| Joseph McKenna wrote: |
|
We have a possible bug with elog that the ID for an elog entry at over 99,999 entires reads as 10,000...
68792/1 Illistrates the problem, we use this ID often to cross reference from out datalog...
Is this a know bug we can find a fix for? We are using: elogd 2.9.2 built Jul 14 2015, 18:58:06 revision
|
|
|
|
|
|
69284
|
Fri Dec 18 18:08:54 2020 |
| Chris Körner | chris.koerner@physik.uni-halle.de | Request | Other | 3.1.3 | outdated debian package | Hi everyone,
I am currently trying to setup elog as a docker container. I wonder if there is any reason why the elog debian package is stuck at version 3.1.3? Would it be possible to update it to the latest version?
Thanks very much! |
|