Sentinel Database Update & Favorites?

[jonwienke]

As I suggested give users a choice with a simple check box to update Fav's or not.

As I pointed out, that's NOT possible.

 

[powerhouse]

Forgive me for being incredibly naïve or just not understanding but, Sentinel already knows if there is a change between what's on the scanner and what's in the software with regards to any changes because it always asks me if I want to keep it as is on the radio or in the software. Now why can't it see that a new fire tac talk group id, for example, has been added to a system that is already in the scanner and simply ask if you want to add that talk group to your already existing system or not? If you do want to add it, then you would be responsible at that point to have this new talk group set up to what ever naming or any other unique settings you want to match your existing preferences.
My thinking is since the software already does some sort of comparison, why can't it also see a new talk group id number or such within a system that you already have programmed into your software/radio?
It would seem to me that since talk groups are already assigned a descriptor i.e. "fire tac." or "dispatch" etc., and if you have those services enabled in your radio, it should be a simple matter of the software seeing this and simply asking "Do you want to add this new talk group id to your existing XYZ system? If you do, then you check the box, the talk group is added and then you go in and set up whatever naming conventions or other parameters or unique settings that you wish. If not, don't check the box and the new talk group wont get added.
Jon, you are much more knowledgeable about this than I and must defer to your expertise on this matter. It just seems to me, (in my limited understanding), a simple fix.

 

[ofd8001]

Sentinel looks at the file date time stamps for the FLs in the scanner and computer. If there is a difference then you get the choices. No other comparison is done.

folks who have never developed software think changes are easier than they really are.

 

[ProScan]

Sentinel looks at the file date time stamps for the FLs in the scanner and computer. If there is a difference then you get the choices. No other comparison is done.

folks who have never developed software think changes are easier than they really are.

Exactly. I was just composing a reply when you posted that. It's a 4 second difference between the Favorite on the computer and the scanner that will trigger the prompt asking how to handle it.

 

[ofd8001]

It could also be sentinel compares file sizes or perhaps archive bits, but I’ve been led to believe its the dates that are compared.

 

[powerhouse]

I agree with you since I've never developed any software and as I said I may be and probably am incredibly naïve, however, if you get enough of the right minds involved in trying to solve an issue whether real or perceived, someone might eventually come up with a solution equitable to all.
Since this issue keeps coming up, I guess the question becomes is it that this cannot be done period, or that it can't be done in the current way the software is written?

 

[ProScan]

It could also be sentinel compares file sizes or perhaps archive bits, but I’ve been led to believe its the dates that are compared.

It's the last write file attribute. Not the file size because the file size comparison will be inaccurate because some fields may have a choice of 1,2,3 etc. if 1 was changed to 2 then the file size will be the same. The only text comparison is in the f_list.cfg file comparing the favorites options.

 

[powerhouse]

Wasn't someone here working on a favorites list comparator software a few years ago for one of the older either 396 or x36 models?
I wonder what ever became of that? If I remember correctly it didn't get a lot of traction but it sounded promising.

 

[ProScan]

I agree with you since I've never developed any software and as I said I may be and probably am incredibly naïve, however, if you get enough of the right minds involved in trying to solve an issue whether real or perceived, someone might eventually come up with a solution equitable to all.

I get a kick out of these. I love it when people volunteering other people's time because there lame excuse "I've never developed any software".
That's shouldn't be a excuse nowadays with online searching.
For starters, here's the RadioReference API

API - The RadioReference Wiki

wiki.radioreference.com

Here's the link to the HPDB.
C:\ProgramData\Uniden\BCDx36HP_Sentinel\Database

Once you're up to speed, we can appoint you the lead.

 

[powerhouse]

Didn't mean to upset you by any means nor "volunteer" your time. I'm a power plant operator and heavy metal drummer. It's what I do.
I am not a software developer....... like yourself.
I thought these "discussions" were so that we all could gain a better understanding.
Apparently I was wrong.
Please forgive me for asking apparently stupid questions.
BTW, I don't wish to be "the lead". I'll leave that to those who think they know it all.
Carry On!

 

[ProScan]

I thought these "discussions" were so that we all could gain a better understanding.
Apparently I was wrong.
Please forgive me for asking apparently stupid questions.

I never said anything about your question. The post I responded to didn't contain any questions. Continue the discussion if you want. I was just joking. Lighten up a bit. I'll try to contribute with what i know and yes, it's very much doable.

 

[powerhouse]

Sorry I took it the wrong way. I suppose I do need to lighten up a bit.
Back to topic, I do look forward to reading responses to these discussions from very knowledgeable and capable contributors such as yourself and I very much appreciate the help and experience you and others have given over the years.

 

[buddrousa]

I guess what gets old is when something is ask and people post the answer the person that ask the question does not except the answer from those that know.

 

[iMONITOR]

Mods, I guess it's time to close the thread. Apparently it was a bad idea.

Thanks

 

[powerhouse]

Although Proscan did say it’s doable, I agree it’s probably no use beating this dead horse and the thread should be closed.

 

[belvdr]

Updated how? If there is a difference between a FL and the database, there are 4 possible options:

1. Propagate the change from the database to the FL.
2. Ignore the difference.
3. Delete an item in a FL that doesn't exist in the database.
4. Add an item from the database that doesn't exist in the FL.

Explain how the computer will select the correct option without querying the user for each difference.

It’s dead simple for what I’m asking for. It’s your option 1. Don’t add or delete. That’s how the primary key becomes useful. For example, a change in a TG description or use would be easily handled.

 

[jonwienke]

It’s dead simple for what I’m asking for. It’s your option 1. Don’t add or delete. That’s how the primary key becomes useful. For example, a change in a TG description or use would be easily handled.

That doesn't work in most cases. If you make any changes to a FL, such as moving a TG to a different department, or editing a channel label, then all of those changes get wiped if you allow any update to a FL. And that's what most people don't want.

If you want to update FLs from the database, you have to have some way to pick and choose which changes get propagated and which don't, or you end up doing more harm than good. There isn't any "one check box" way to do that.

 

[belvdr]

That doesn't work in most cases. If you make any changes to a FL, such as moving a TG to a different department, or editing a channel label, then all of those changes get wiped if you allow any update to a FL. And that's what most people don't want.

If you want to update FLs from the database, you have to have some way to pick and choose which changes get propagated and which don't, or you end up doing more harm than good. There isn't any "one check box" way to do that.

Just like global filters. If you make manual changes, then you have the option to not update.

 

[jonwienke]

Just like global filters. If you make manual changes, then you have the option to not update.

Only if you query the user separately for every difference. Otherwise it's all or nothing.

 

[belvdr]

Only if you query the user separately for every difference. Otherwise it's all or nothing.

No need to query the user. If the global is set to update existing entries, say 100, and 15 are individually locked, then only 85 would be auto-updated.