Re: Problem with large entry size, posted by Stefan Ritt on Tue Oct 24 21:58:54 2006
|
| Dimitrios Tsirigkas wrote: | Hi Stefan,
A lot of performance-related trouble for us comes from the ability of users to click on "All" and display thousands of entries on the same page. Is there a way to disable that? Even if the ELCode parsing performance of Elog increases greatly, the combination of "Full" mode and "All" will still cause trouble, will it not?
Thanks,
Dimitris |
What about a threshold for the "All" display? If a logbook contains less than, let's say, 500 entries, the "All" link is displayed, and above 500 entries it's hidden. Would that make sense? |
|
Re: Problem with large entry size, posted by Dimitrios Tsirigkas on Thu Nov 2 10:14:11 2006
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: | | What about a threshold for the "All" display? If a logbook contains less than, let's say, 500 entries, the "All" link is displayed, and above 500 entries it's hidden. Would that make sense? |
Hi Stefan,
Sorry for the late response, I was away for a few days. Yes, I think that this would make perfect sense, especially if the maximum number of entries was configurable.
Cheers,
Dimitris |
Spell check, posted by David Egolf on Mon Nov 6 17:13:19 2006
|
Sorry if this has been asked.
Is there a spell check that can be implemented in Elog or any recommended add on spell check?
Thanks,
David Egolf |
|
Re: Spell check, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Nov 6 17:18:04 2006
|
| David Egolf wrote: | Is there a spell check that can be implemented in Elog or any recommended add on spell check?
|
I personally use Mozilla Firefox 2.0 which has already a built in spell checker. For MS IE, you can use IESpell (http://www.iespell.com). |
|
Re: Spell check, posted by Fergus Lynch on Mon Nov 6 17:36:35 2006
|
| David Egolf wrote: | Sorry if this has been asked.
Is there a spell check that can be implemented in Elog or any recommended add on spell check?
Thanks,
David Egolf |
I find that the Google spell checker works very well in IE6. |
|
Re: Problem with large entry size, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Nov 9 21:22:27 2006
|
| Dimitrios Tsirigkas wrote: |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: | | What about a threshold for the "All" display? If a logbook contains less than, let's say, 500 entries, the "All" link is displayed, and above 500 entries it's hidden. Would that make sense? |
Hi Stefan,
Sorry for the late response, I was away for a few days. Yes, I think that this would make perfect sense, especially if the maximum number of entries was configurable.
Cheers,
Dimitris |
Agree. So I implemented the new config option All display limit. The default is 500. So you can see that at this forum, the All link is not shown any more, since the logbook contains more than 500 entries. The promised performance improvement of the page display will take me some more time, but I will not forget it. |
Attributes according to users, posted by ather khan on Sat Nov 18 11:19:14 2006
|
Hi,
Is it possible to have certain attributtes available to certain user in one log boolk.
We have log book where the supervisor assign jobs to employees and we want only supervisor to have assign to attributes available and others only to view it.
thanks,
Ather |
|
Re: Attributes according to users, posted by Stefan Ritt on Sat Nov 18 17:13:22 2006
|
| ather khan wrote: | Hi,
Is it possible to have certain attributtes available to certain user in one log boolk.
We have log book where the supervisor assign jobs to employees and we want only supervisor to have assign to attributes available and others only to view it.
|
You cannot restrict the modification if certain attributes, but you can restrict edits in general with the command
Allow edit = <name of admin>
You can also restrict the New, Delete, etc. commands to be only executable by the supervisor. |