Topics

Resending many QSOs to LOTW

Floyd Sense
 

I had a certificate problem that I've resolved, but now have the situation where I have perhaps a thousand QSOs from the past year in DXKeeper that are marked as sent to LOTW, but are not really in the LOTW database.  What is the most painless way to get these log entries resent from DXKeeper to LOTW? 


I know about the check box in DXKeeper QSL config, LOTW tab that allows QSOs already sent to be resent, but, here's what it says in the Help:


"when checked, all QSOs will be uploaded whether or not they've already been uploaded to LotW; this setting will be disabled after the QSOs are uploaded"


Does that really mean that checking that box will cause ALL QSOs in the log to be uploaded again?  If so, is there anything I need to do at the LOTW end regarding the duplicate QSOs?


I don't need all the gory details, just some general guidance.  Thanks!


73, Floyd - K8AC


 

Dave AA6YQ
 

AA6YQ comments below
From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 8:10 PM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: [dxlab] Resending many QSOs to LOTW

I had a certificate problem that I've resolved, but now have the situation where I have perhaps a thousand QSOs from the past year in DXKeeper that are marked as sent to LOTW, but are not really in the LOTW database. What is the most painless way to get these log entries resent from DXKeeper to LOTW?

I know about the check box in DXKeeper QSL config, LOTW tab that allows QSOs already sent to be resent, but, here's what it says in the Help:

"when checked, all QSOs will be uploaded whether or not they've already been uploaded to LotW; this setting will be disabled after the QSOs are uploaded"

Does that really mean that checking that box will cause ALL QSOs in the log to be uploaded again?

No. Populate the QSL Queue with the QSOs you wish to resubmit, and then click the "Upload to LoTW" button. All QSOs in the QSL Queue will be resubmitted, whether or not they've aleady been submitted to LoTW.
73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Floyd Sense
 

OK.  So the best way to get those QSOs back on the Q would be to set the QSL sent field to "R" and then use the Add Requested button, right?

Dave AA6YQ
 

>>>AA6YQ comments below

 

From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 8:30 PM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: RE: [dxlab] Resending many QSOs to LOTW


OK.  So the best way to get those QSOs back on the Q would be to set the QSL sent field to "R" and then use the Add Requested button, right?

 

>>>That’s one way. If you can filter the Log Page Display to contain the QSOs you wish to resubmit, you can instead use the “Add All” button to populate the QSL Queue without modifying “LOTW QSL Sent”.

 

         73,

 

               Dave, AA6YQ

Floyd Sense
 

Well, got the QSOs sent to LOTW - turns out there were 2,971 in all.  I've been waiting over an hour and they still don't show up in the database.  If there was an error, there's no indication at all.  I was able to send some singles up and that worked OK.  Maybe large updates are queued for processing much later?

Dave AA6YQ
 

At 2Z, the LoTW processing queue was only a few minutes long:

http://www.arrl.org/logbook-queue-status

 

     73,

 

          Dave, AA6YQ

 

From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 10:01 PM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: RE: [dxlab] Resending many QSOs to LOTW

 



Well, got the QSOs sent to LOTW - turns out there were 2,971 in all.  I've been waiting over an hour and they still don't show up in the database.  If there was an error, there's no indication at all.  I was able to send some singles up and that worked OK.  Maybe large updates are queued for processing much later?


Stan Gammons <s_gammons@...>
 

Does that mean they have upgraded/added more servers to better handle the load?   I'm getting old and forgetful, but I seem to recall such an effort being in the works.


73

Stan
KM4HQE


On 10/16/2017 09:05 PM, 'Dave AA6YQ' aa6yq@... [dxlab] wrote:
 

At 2Z, the LoTW processing queue was only a few minutes long:

http://www.arrl.org/logbook-queue-status

 

     73,

 

          Dave, AA6YQ

 

From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 10:01 PM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: RE: [dxlab] Resending many QSOs to LOTW

 



Well, got the QSOs sent to LOTW - turns out there were 2,971 in all.  I've been waiting over an hour and they still don't show up in the database.  If there was an error, there's no indication at all.  I was able to send some singles up and that worked OK.  Maybe large updates are queued for processing much later?



Dave AA6YQ
 

>>>AA6YQ comments below

 

From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 10:14 PM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: Re: [dxlab] Resending many QSOs to LOTW

Does that mean they have upgraded/added more servers to better handle the load?   I'm getting old and forgetful, but I seem to recall such an effort being in the works.

>>>The component of LoTW that processes uploaded QSOs, referred to as the “LoTW Server”, was significantly updated; part of this effort included replacing a database engine interface implemented with a proprietary C++ API with one implemented in ODBC – an industry standard. This first stage has roughly doubled the rate at which uploaded QSOs can be processed. It was deployed to production back in early August. Performance will increase further when the database engine is upgraded, an action previously prevented by the dependency on the C++ API.

     73,

              Dave, AA6YQ

Stan Gammons <s_gammons@...>
 

Great!

I seem to remember you talking about it before and you probably posted info about the upgrade back then.  I just don't remember.  This summer has been a bit hectic too.

Thanks for the info.


73

Stan
KM4HQE


On 10/16/2017 10:10 PM, 'Dave AA6YQ' aa6yq@... [dxlab] wrote:
 

>>>AA6YQ comments below

 

From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 10:14 PM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: Re: [dxlab] Resending many QSOs to LOTW

Does that mean they have upgraded/added more servers to better handle the load?   I'm getting old and forgetful, but I seem to recall such an effort being in the works.

>>>The component of LoTW that processes uploaded QSOs, referred to as the “LoTW Server”, was significantly updated; part of this effort included replacing a database engine interface implemented with a proprietary C++ API with one implemented in ODBC – an industry standard. This first stage has roughly doubled the rate at which uploaded QSOs can be processed. It was deployed to production back in early August. Performance will increase further when the database engine is upgraded, an action previously prevented by the dependency on the C++ API.

     73,

              Dave, AA6YQ




Dave AA6YQ
 

The best way to keep abreast of LoTW status is to join the LoTW Yahoo Group:

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ARRL-LOTW

 

     73,

 

             Dave, AA6YQ

 

From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 12:02 AM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: Re: [dxlab] Resending many QSOs to LOTW

Great!

I seem to remember you talking about it before and you probably posted info about the upgrade back then.  I just don't remember.  This summer has been a bit hectic too.

Thanks for the info.

73

Stan
KM4HQE

On 10/16/2017 10:10 PM, 'Dave AA6YQ' aa6yq@... [dxlab] wrote:

 

>>>AA6YQ comments below

 

From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 10:14 PM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: Re: [dxlab] Resending many QSOs to LOTW

Does that mean they have upgraded/added more servers to better handle the load?   I'm getting old and forgetful, but I seem to recall such an effort being in the works.

>>>The component of LoTW that processes uploaded QSOs, referred to as the “LoTW Server”, was significantly updated; part of this effort included replacing a database engine interface implemented with a proprietary C++ API with one implemented in ODBC – an industry standard. This first stage has roughly doubled the rate at which uploaded QSOs can be processed. It was deployed to production back in early August. Performance will increase further when the database engine is upgraded, an action previously prevented by the dependency on the C++ API.

     73,

              Dave, AA6YQ