Topics

UDP

Valery Prodanov
 

QSO from WSJT-X logged on the first second,

but QSO from JTDX logged on a fifth second.

Why?


--
Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!

Bob
 

Do you mean the QSO start time is different between WSJT-X and JTDX? You will have to ask the authors of those programs. Logger32 simply uses the start/end in it receives. SeventyThree(s).

On August 8, 2019 at 10:29 AM Valery Prodanov <ur5wca@...> wrote:

QSO from WSJT-X logged on the first second,

but QSO from JTDX logged on a fifth second.

Why?


--
Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!

Valery Prodanov
 

in 379 versions Logger32  was all ok

чт, 8 авг. 2019 г. в 18:37, Bob <k4cy@...>:

Do you mean the QSO start time is different between WSJT-X and JTDX? You will have to ask the authors of those programs. Logger32 simply uses the start/end in it receives. SeventyThree(s).

On August 8, 2019 at 10:29 AM Valery Prodanov <ur5wca@...> wrote:

QSO from WSJT-X logged on the first second,

but QSO from JTDX logged on a fifth second.

Why?


--
Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!



--
Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!

Jim Altman
 

I think he means the interval between the time wsjt and jtdx say ‘log it’ and the time logger32 actually logs it.  It is longer from jtdx, but I always thought it to be of no consequence.

 

 

 

Jim Altman

jaltman636@...

 

From: hamlogger@groups.io <hamlogger@groups.io> On Behalf Of Valery Prodanov
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 11:56 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] UDP

 

in 379 versions Logger32  was all ok

 

чт, 8 авг. 2019 г. в 18:37, Bob <k4cy@...>:

Do you mean the QSO start time is different between WSJT-X and JTDX? You will have to ask the authors of those programs. Logger32 simply uses the start/end in it receives. SeventyThree(s).

On August 8, 2019 at 10:29 AM Valery Prodanov <ur5wca@...> wrote:

QSO from WSJT-X logged on the first second,

but QSO from JTDX logged on a fifth second.

Why?


--

Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!



--

Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!

Valery Prodanov
 

Maybe, but in 379 versions of Logger32 all was ok.

чт, 8 авг. 2019 г. в 18:59, Jim Altman <jaltman636@...>:

I think he means the interval between the time wsjt and jtdx say ‘log it’ and the time logger32 actually logs it.  It is longer from jtdx, but I always thought it to be of no consequence.

 

 

 

Jim Altman

jaltman636@...

 

From: hamlogger@groups.io <hamlogger@groups.io> On Behalf Of Valery Prodanov
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 11:56 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] UDP

 

in 379 versions Logger32  was all ok

 

чт, 8 авг. 2019 г. в 18:37, Bob <k4cy@...>:

Do you mean the QSO start time is different between WSJT-X and JTDX? You will have to ask the authors of those programs. Logger32 simply uses the start/end in it receives. SeventyThree(s).

On August 8, 2019 at 10:29 AM Valery Prodanov <ur5wca@...> wrote:

QSO from WSJT-X logged on the first second,

but QSO from JTDX logged on a fifth second.

Why?


--

Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!



--

Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!



--
Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!

Bob
 

Jim, maybe ..when logging a QSO from a UDP message, Logger32 waits four seconds before actually writing the QSO to the logbook. This is the same for all logging by UDP message. The reason is twofold - 1) it is very bust at the time Logger32 receives the message to log, not wanting to use CPU cycles ant the busy time, and 2) programs like MSHV can send multiple logging request, so the orderly queuing of logging requests and processing the one by one at a non busy time (in the middle of the cycle) is desirable.


Now when using JTDX it is possible to log by TCP message. This logging request is processed immediately on receipt. Why not wait the same four seconds as UDP requests? Because TCP logging is generic, and not for WSJT-X/JTDX only, and no need to delay. If this is why the different times are noticed, then JTDX logging by TCP can be turned off, and logging by UDP turned on.


SeventyThree(s)


Logger32 waits. Now JTDX can log by TCP 

On August 8, 2019 at 11:59 AM Jim Altman <jaltman636@...> wrote:

I think he means the interval between the time wsjt and jtdx say ‘log it’ and the time logger32 actually logs it.  It is longer from jtdx, but I always thought it to be of no consequence.

 

 

 

Jim Altman

jaltman636@...

 

From: hamlogger@groups.io <hamlogger@groups.io> On Behalf Of Valery Prodanov
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 11:56 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] UDP

 

in 379 versions Logger32  was all ok

 

чт, 8 авг. 2019 г. в 18:37, Bob <k4cy@...>:

Do you mean the QSO start time is different between WSJT-X and JTDX? You will have to ask the authors of those programs. Logger32 simply uses the start/end in it receives. SeventyThree(s).

On August 8, 2019 at 10:29 AM Valery Prodanov <ur5wca@...> wrote:

QSO from WSJT-X logged on the first second,

but QSO from JTDX logged on a fifth second.

Why?


--

Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!



--

Best regards!
Valery P. Prodanov
UR5WCA
73!