Update database entries from ADIF file
Posted: 02 Aug 2021, 13:59
Hello,
I use LOG4OM version 2.xx since about a year, mostly for FT8 QSOs but a few phone QSOs as well. Only now I found that I made a consistent mistake with WSJT-X from the beginning: when prompted to log the QSO, I entered the TX-power with a trailing "W" (e.g. 100W). LOG4OM silently ignores that entry, as it expects a number, not a text and therefore all records have the TX-power missing (TX power = 0). I'm not too active, but the number of affected entries is now in the order of 500. Well, admittedly, my mistake.
I can easily and semi-automatically edit the WSJT-X ADIF file with a text editor to correct the TX-power entries, but when I import the modified ADIF file in LOG4OM, the records are (correctly) detected a duplicates and are entirely ignored. My expectation would be, that any modified fields update the records in the database. Is there any setting which achieves such a behaviour? Or is there any better way to fix the database?
May I also suggest that a mistake in an imported ADIF record (e.g. entering a text instead of a number) would be flagged as info, warning or error, at least optionally?
tnx and vy73,
Michael, DK8PP
I use LOG4OM version 2.xx since about a year, mostly for FT8 QSOs but a few phone QSOs as well. Only now I found that I made a consistent mistake with WSJT-X from the beginning: when prompted to log the QSO, I entered the TX-power with a trailing "W" (e.g. 100W). LOG4OM silently ignores that entry, as it expects a number, not a text and therefore all records have the TX-power missing (TX power = 0). I'm not too active, but the number of affected entries is now in the order of 500. Well, admittedly, my mistake.
I can easily and semi-automatically edit the WSJT-X ADIF file with a text editor to correct the TX-power entries, but when I import the modified ADIF file in LOG4OM, the records are (correctly) detected a duplicates and are entirely ignored. My expectation would be, that any modified fields update the records in the database. Is there any setting which achieves such a behaviour? Or is there any better way to fix the database?
May I also suggest that a mistake in an imported ADIF record (e.g. entering a text instead of a number) would be flagged as info, warning or error, at least optionally?
tnx and vy73,
Michael, DK8PP