WHS StokerLog add-in possible?


 
WHS is built on Windows Server so the implementation will be possible. Question would be what we would get out of it. Since you can run stokerlog remotely already from stoker, then having it run in WHS won't provide that benefit.

Any angles I am not seeing here?
 
Amir,

Where I could see the advantage would be for a long smoke where I would monitor part of it from home and part from work. I figure if the WHS could manage the cook I would be able to monitor from a central location, i.e. if I'm at work I can see everything that happened after I log onto my work computer. Also, I wouldn't have to leave a computer and the WHS running all night if I want to monitor a cook.

I suppose I could remote desktop to the WHS and install stokerlog and achieve the same results. I guess one could argue another big reason would be to have one more gadget "play" with.

I think I'll try to install it via RDT.
 
I see, so the WHS suggestion would imply that the controlling code be factored from the user interface.

The controlling code, running on the WHS would be on a reliable local network. The user interface could run on any unreliable net you can get to without compromising the cooking management.

The WHS box is also the most likely on the local network to already be accessible from the outside, avoiding or at least centralizing the port munging issues.

What I don't know is how much 'management' by StokerLog actually goes on during a cook? Is there more than the sounding of alarms?

I apologize for my ignorance, I have not yet cooked with a Stoker or StokerLog.
 
Joe,

Nothing is preventing from monitoring it from your home or at work using the same StokerLog software. As long as you have all the correct firewall forwarding rules in place you can monitor it from and host on the internet. So could anyone else for that matter.

-rob
 
Rob,

You are absolutely correct.

However, say I start a cook at 11 PM and have Stokerlog running on my home computer. At 8 AM I go into work and fire up Stokerlog on my work computer not that it's important but I can't see what happened between 11 PM and 8 AM when I start it on my work computer. It would just be nice to have access to the data for entire cook from any computer regardless as to when and if stokerlog was started on it. Also, it would be nice not to have an extra computer running just to log the cook.
 
Joe,

The need for continuity of data collection would justify (at least in my mind) creating a module for a server computer separate from a UI module that could access it from anywhere.

To behave similarly to the current implementation, both the data collection/management module and the UI could be installed in one operation on the same computer.

To act as a client-server, only the server module would be needed on the WHS and only the UI modules would be needed on client computers.

Saying that is, of course, much easier than doing it.

John
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Saying that is, of course, much easier than doing it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I can barely say it
icon_biggrin.gif
 
Joe,

I see what you are saying. I believe the software will email you the charts at specific intervals though so in a sense you will be getting the data.

-rob
 
One more feature of stokerlog. It saves everything it reads from stoker in a text file. So if you can see that file remotely, you can graph it in Excel, etc.

If you are using Linux at work, you could do "tail -f logfile" and see the new data as they arrive....

And yes, client server is high on the list of architectural changes. But it requires so much work that the need has to be stronger than what is expressed
icon_smile.gif
.
 

 

Back
Top