Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

On 5/7/23 13:39, Timo Korhonen via Core-talk wrote:

Hello,

Can somebody remind me about timestamp handling with monitors?

Namely, we see the following behaviour:

caget  -a <record>

and

pvget <record>

and

camonitor <record>

give the same timestamp, but

pvmonitor <record>

gives a different one, rather far in the past.

The record in question is a sequence record. VAL has no other meaning there except causing the record to process, right? VAL of the record in question is always null.

Thus, there are no monitor updates (as far as I have seen).

Interestingly enough, when I do pvmonitor <record>.VAL, I get the same timestamp as with the three other methods.

I was asked why this happens but I could not figure out the reason. I vaguely remember some discussion on this but could not find any hints.

I also can't think of a reason.  Nor do I recall any discussion where "record" and "record.VAL" behave differently.

Can you share details about the situation, including module versions?

Replies:

Re: Timestamp behaviour in pvmonitor vs camonitor Timo Korhonen via Core-talk

References:

Timestamp behaviour in pvmonitor vs camonitor Timo Korhonen via Core-talk

Navigate by Date:

Prev: Timestamp behaviour in pvmonitor vs camonitor Timo Korhonen via Core-talk

Next: Re: Timestamp behaviour in pvmonitor vs camonitor Timo Korhonen via Core-talk

Index: 2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  <2023>  2024 

Navigate by Thread:

Prev: Timestamp behaviour in pvmonitor vs camonitor Timo Korhonen via Core-talk

Next: Re: Timestamp behaviour in pvmonitor vs camonitor Timo Korhonen via Core-talk

Index: 2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  <2023>  2024