I just set up an areaDetector simDetector to run with a very small ROI and short acquire time and acquire period. It is computing about 1200 new images per second.
This is a Linux IOC that is processing many records per image. Here is the output of camonitor on the image counter PV:
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.561426) 78635
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.561745) 78636
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.562320) 78637
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.562860) 78638
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.563468) 78639
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.563998) 78640
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.564548) 78641
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.565135) 78642
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.565706) 78643
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.566242) 78644
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.566817) 78645
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.567354) 78646
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.567846) 78647
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.568436) 78648
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.569005) 78649
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.569513) 78650
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.570096) 78651
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.570678) 78652
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.571235) 78653
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.571846) 78654
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.572373) 78655
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.572909) 78656
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.573487) 78657
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.574075) 78658
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.574565) 78659
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.575156) 78660
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.575704) 78661
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.576291) 78662
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.576888) 78663
13SIM1:cam1:ArrayCounter_RBV (2013-12-18 13:19:53.577468) 78664
So you can see that it is only about 600-700 microseconds per callback, and this is by no means limited by the rate at which records can process.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Rivers
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 1:16 PM
To: 'Evgeniy'; Eric Norum
Cc: EPICS Tech Talk
Subject: RE: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz
What EPICS record, and how did you measure that? Something is very wrong.
Here is a paper with performance measurements on an ancient (~20 years ago) 68040 that shows only 150 microseconds was required for a bi record, including posting a CA monitor.
http://www.aps.anl.gov/epics/EpicsDocumentation/EpicsGeneral/epicsX5Farch-1.html#HEADING1-23
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Evgeniy
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 1:07 PM
To: Eric Norum
Cc: EPICS Tech Talk
Subject: Re: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz
Processing of an EPICS record takes ~2 milliseconds on my SL5.3/DELL
2.27 GHz. It is unbelievably slow!
Is it possible to shorten this time without rebuilding Linux kernel?
-------- Original Message --------
> On Nov 27, 2013, at 11:29 AM, Evgeniy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Andrew and Emmanuel for your replies.
>>
>> I am running Soft IOC on Dell server (64 bit) with eight Intel Xeon CPUs, each 2.27GHz.
>> It seems that syntax for dbd file is correct. I found that minimum scan period for my system is 0.001 seconds. For shorter periods it falls down to 0.1 second, as Andrew mentioned.
>> The difference in one CPU usage is only 5% if I run records with scan 0.1 second or 0.001 second. It looks like it is limitation of EPICS, not hardware.
> Or perhaps the kernel timer implementation has a resolution of 1 ms?
>> What is the bottleneck for processing of a record on GHz CPUs?
>> Is it possible to improve it?
>>
>> Evgeniy
- Replies:
- Re: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Evgeniy
- References:
- Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Evgeniy
- Re: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Andrew Johnson
- Re: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Evgeniy
- Re: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Eric Norum
- Re: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Evgeniy
- RE: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Mark Rivers
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
RE: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Mark Rivers
- Next:
Re: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Andrew Johnson
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
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:
RE: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Mark Rivers
- Next:
Re: Increasing scan rate to 10 kHz Evgeniy
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
<2013>
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|