2002 2003 2004 <2005> 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 | Index | 2002 2003 2004 <2005> 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 |
<== Date ==> | <== Thread ==> |
---|
Subject: | Re: Control System Data Access API |
From: | Ralph Lange <[email protected]> |
To: | EPICS Core Talk <[email protected]> |
Date: | Thu, 20 Oct 2005 15:29:09 +0200 |
Hmm... You're mixing granularity levels: Nowadays every PV name that doesn't contain a dot is regarded as a record name. Do you want to create explicit alias definitions for all (pseudo) fields of that (pseudo) device record? You will end up with zillions of alias definitions on a single IOC. If you try to escape by aliasing only on the same (record) level, you don't gain as much. Simply having other names for records just creates ambiguity - which of the many names for the same record do you use for archiving? For snapshots? For the alarms? How do you compare snapshots that contain the same record under different names? Guess this needs more thought - maybe too simple?! Ralph Marty Kraimer wrote: If I read this correctly it is just asking for the CA server to support aliases. |