Topics

Tellique under Win 98SE?

M5WJF <m5wjf.qthr@...>
 

Hi All,

I'm losing up to 50% of all data segments gathered under a Receiver
PC with Win 98SE as the OS, which has the following spec AMD 1.2GHz,
256MB PC100, yet manage between 70-80% signal with SNR of 10.8 -
12.3 and BER without any errors or uncorrected blocks.

I have the five channels listed under Data Services, and cannot
explain the lost segments, even after using a more accurate Symbol
Rate of 27531 kS/s.

Perhaps it's the use of 98SE here, since the log file proves to be
interesting reading, receive buffers unable to be adapted causing
lost reception, file system full and removing information about
delivered data, and it seems a new key causes these problems to be
repeated over and over.

Is there a value I can change within the configuration files, is
there a newer version of tqrecv that cures this fault, or am I
doomed to the purchase another copy of XP?

All processing is done under Win XP Pro, on an AMD XP 2200+ with 1GB
DDR266, over a 100Mbit Network.

73 de Wayne M5WJF

M5WJF <m5wjf.qthr@...>
 

Hi All,

I've removed Channel 3 from the PID List to concentrate the hardware
on Channel 2, to check if there's any difference (not expecting
anything).

Clutching of straws here...

73 de Wayne M5WJF

David J Taylor
 

I'm losing up to 50% of all data segments gathered under a Receiver
PC with Win 98SE as the OS
Wayne, has it always behaved like this, or is this lossy behaviour new?
Win98SE would not be my first choice of OS for this job.

You might want to try removing the PID for HRIT data and leaving just the
LRIT stream, purely as an experiment....

Cheers,
David

David J Taylor
 

AMD 1.2GHz, 256MB PC100, yet manage between 70-80% signal
with SNR of 10.8 - 12.3 and BER without any errors or uncorrected
blocks.

For comparison, I use a Pentium III 550MHz with 512MB of memory, quality
60%, SNR 9.3dB, take all LRIT and HRIT, and normally get zero missing
segments. Could Windows 2000 be the answer?

Look back over the messages here with the search facility on the Group's
Web interface - I'm sure someone else is using Windows 98 without a 50%
segment loss....

Cheers,
David

Paul Telco <paul@...>
 

Hi,

I'm beginning to think that using win98 for the receiver is a bad idea after
all. I get quite a lot of missing segments, far more than others report.

A randomly selected typical missing segment report on my system looks like
this:

Cycle: 1200
msg-ch01, seg: 5
msg-ch02, seg: 2 5
msg-ch03, seg: 3 5 6
msg-ch04, seg: 2 5
msg-ch05, seg: 2 3 4 5 6
msg-ch06, seg: 4 5 6
msg-ch07, seg: 2 3 5 6 7
msg-ch08, seg: 2 3 4 5
msg-ch09, seg: 2 5
msg-ch10, seg: 2 4 5
msg-ch11, seg: 2 3 4 5 7
msg-ch12, seg: 6 7 12 13 14 16

It is better than 50% segment loss but not much! I intend to upgrade to XP
Home this week, without changing anything else if possible, just to see if
the segment loss is improved.

My receiver PC is an AMD 500-K2 with 128MB (!!) and Win98. I get 55-58%
'Quality' and SNR 9.0

Incidentally, I did not get a system crash last night.

Paul

a_van_belle
 

--- In MSG-1@..., "Paul Telco" <paul@t...> wrote:
Hi,

I'm beginning to think that using win98 for the receiver is a bad
idea after
all. I get quite a lot of missing segments, far more than others
report.
.....

It is better than 50% segment loss but not much! I intend to
upgrade to XP
Home this week, without changing anything else if possible, just to
see if
the segment loss is improved.

My receiver PC is an AMD 500-K2 with 128MB (!!) and Win98. I get
55-58%
'Quality' and SNR 9.0

Incidentally, I did not get a system crash last night.

Paul
Hello Paul,

W98 should do a lot better, try to enlarge memory first.
The buffer size warning is very common for W98, no cure known for
that.
The filesystem full problem is not common, be sure to have at least
200 Mb free space on the drive where Tellique is installed, as it
does need this to store the 0.fsy and 1.fsy files (can get up to 102
Mb each !)
128 Mb memory is very marginal and I would not recommend to install
memory greedy XP on this machine !
Better go for a lean and stable W2000 professional. I have run my
Celeron 800 MHz with 256 Mb mem W2K SP3 from May 2003 and have good
results. My last reboot was on September 18th due to an update of the
Tellique client !

Your Signal quality looks OK (especially of you use the new version
2.6b, this one has a readout of about 10 to 12 % lower compared to
version 2.3)

Greetings,
Arne van Belle

M5WJF <m5wjf.qthr@...>
 

--- In MSG-1@..., "David J Taylor" <david-taylor@b...>
wrote:
You might want to try removing the PID for HRIT data and leaving
just the
LRIT stream, purely as an experiment....
Hi David,

Just processing 2.5GB taken from last night till this evening, with
just the PID for HRIT enabled (see my last), and still loads of
segments missing.

I've previously had all channels enabled and working fine (no lost
segments) under Win XP Pro, so the problem is definitely something
relating to Win 98SE.

Seems another copy of XP is required :-(

Hope that 256MB of PC100 is enough for XP, following your other
comments regarding minimum spec.

73 de Wayne M5WJF

M5WJF <m5wjf.qthr@...>
 

--- In MSG-1@..., "a_van_belle" <a.van.belle@h...> wrote:
The filesystem full problem is not common, be sure to have at
least
200 Mb free space on the drive where Tellique is installed, as it
does need this to store the 0.fsy and 1.fsy files (can get up to
102
Mb each !)
128 Mb memory is very marginal and I would not recommend to
install
memory greedy XP on this machine !
The file system full problem is repeated here in a dedicated 7GB
partition for Tellique gathering raw data under Win 98SE, so even
ensuring adequate free space of 200MB is not a cure.

73 de Wayne M5WJF

David J Taylor
 

Seems another copy of XP is required :-(

Hope that 256MB of PC100 is enough for XP, following your other
comments regarding minimum spec.

73 de Wayne M5WJF
.. or Windows 2000. I would regard 256MB as tight, and would
recommend an install of Windows 2000 (preferred because of lower
memory consumption) or XP with the minimum possible options.

Cheers,
David

David J Taylor
 

The file system full problem is repeated here in a dedicated 7GB
partition for Tellique gathering raw data under Win 98SE, so even
ensuring adequate free space of 200MB is not a cure.

73 de Wayne M5WJF
.. to handle a large number of files properly, particularly when
they have long file names, you need NTFS.

Cheers,
David

M5WJF <m5wjf.qthr@...>
 

--- In MSG-1@..., "David Taylor" <david-taylor@b...>
wrote:

.. to handle a large number of files properly, particularly when
they have long file names, you need NTFS.

Cheers,
David
Hi David,

Well someone had to look at the cheaper alternatives for a two PC
system to gather the data, Hi!

I'm tempted to consider XP Home instead of XP Pro, since Trevor
G0JIX around the corner is happy with this on a single PC system.

I do like the few extras provided under the Pro version I have here
though, if anyone has any PC100 lying about (128MB or greater per
stick) unused after a DDR upgrade, please drop me a line!

73 de Wayne M5WJF

David J Taylor
 

Well someone had to look at the cheaper alternatives for a two PC
system to gather the data, Hi!
It depands how you value your time!

I'm tempted to consider XP Home instead of XP Pro, since Trevor
G0JIX around the corner is happy with this on a single PC system.
.. and I don't hink he's the only one with Home. Should be fine.
Can't you get a discounted Windows 2000 Pro cheaper, though?

I do like the few extras provided under the Pro version I have
here
though, if anyone has any PC100 lying about (128MB or greater per
stick) unused after a DDR upgrade, please drop me a line!
73,
David

a_van_belle
 

--- In MSG-1@..., "David Taylor" <david-taylor@b...>
wrote:
The file system full problem is repeated here in a dedicated 7GB
partition for Tellique gathering raw data under Win 98SE, so even
ensuring adequate free space of 200MB is not a cure.

73 de Wayne M5WJF
.. to handle a large number of files properly, particularly when
they have long file names, you need NTFS.

Cheers,
David
David is right Wayne,
I almost forgot the most important drawback of W98 (that is FAT32 in
general): You can only store 10.292 files with long filenames in one
folder on this file system !

With the current MSG dissemination that is less than a day's raw data.
Alternatively you could schedule a "copy to subfolder" command to
prevent the file system full messages.

When installing W2K or XP don't be tempted to choose the non-default
FAT32 instead of NTFS !

A word about memory, most PC's also except PC133 memory, more
important is to look up in the manual if it needs to be double sided
or single sided memory. I use a PC that does not exept double sided,
so I am left using only 2 x 128 MB because 256 MB DIMMs just count up
to 128 mB !

Greetings,
Arne van Belle