View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
mhweather
Joined: 07 Aug 2005 Posts: 54
|
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 1:28 pm Post subject: Weather Underground Rapid Fire ? |
|
|
Gary at weatherformum told me about some new WU service called Rapid Fire. Looks like a near-real-time display update from personal weather stations. A sample site is:
http://weatherstation.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=IFRANKLI1
Don't know anything more about it, but evidently Weather Display and VWS support this "protocol". Maybe worth a look for Wview ?
Mark
Mullica Hill Weather |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mhweather
Joined: 07 Aug 2005 Posts: 54
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
mteel
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Posts: 435 Location: Collinsville, TX
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like the same posting method other than a few changes for the base URL and a few new fields...
I don't think it makes much sense to update WU at such a high rate - further, I don't think they have fully considered the ramifications of 1000+ stations hitting their server(s) every 2.5 seconds (apparently VP instructions since this is the ISS packet interval).
That's a bunch of web traffic so the data is "up-to-the-second" but only viewed for a fraction of all those updates. I think that will rain bad Internet karma down on them
I don't think it is well conceived by WU and I don't see implementing it in wview. It would not be hard to implement really, just don't want to contribute to a glut of Internet traffic for no good reason. Every five minutes (or whatever your archive interval is) seems to be a good update interval for an Internet archive such as WU.
Just my opinion,
Mark |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mhweather
Joined: 07 Aug 2005 Posts: 54
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not a big WU guy/user myself, just passing it along. Would much rather see a dedicated Java client for Wview that does the same thing. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bmcclinton
Joined: 16 Jan 2006 Posts: 12
|
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll second the Java client. Better to run it the extra bandwidth on demand, rather than continuously.
Bruce |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|