Hi Mark,
The database and subroutine are stripped down to a state that shows the
effect without the complexity of the original code. My question is not
so much how to optimize the subroutine but how to deal with such a
situation which may always happen.
The user actually wants to tell the aSub "do something special (and time
consuming) once"
The only solution I found was to make the slow part asynchronous, which
is a bit complicated but the only "correct" way.
Dirk
On 15.12.2017 17:17, Mark Engbretson wrote:
Wouldn't the actual database file be more useful to post? I.e., there may be a more optimal way to process the record that doesn't take so long (what makes for a slow calculation)?
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dirk Zimoch
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 10:03 AM
To: EPICS <[email protected]>
Subject: Puzzled with lockset(?) problem
Hi Folks,
A colleague puzzled me with a db that shows surprising behavior.
An aSub record is triggered periodically though a CP input link. It looks up if it needs re-initialization (the user can press a button to request that). If yes it does an additional calculation. After processing it resets the record that requested the re-initialization.
See the attached .db file.
Usually when the user presses the button to re-initialize, the aSub does the additional calculation once and then goes back to normal processing.
But the calculation may may take a bit too long -- longer than the rate of the CP input link monitors. In that case, the record never leaves initialization mode!
I have simulated the slow calculation with the attached subroutine code which simply waits. (I know that is is a bad idea to wait in a synchronous subroutine. The original code does not wait but calculates.)
I think that this is an effect of lock sets because the "mode" record is as well input being processed by a caput as well as output of the aSub record. But is this the intended behavior?
The CP monitor finds the record busy (PACT=1) and arranges for re-processing when the record is done. But should not the FLNK be processed and the mode record go to 1 before the aSub runs again?
Any idea how to fix this? Is it necessary to make the subroutine asynchonous? Making the links from and to "mode" CA links does not fix it. Scanning the aSub itself with ".1 second" does not show the strange behavior, it simply delays the scan thread.
Puzzle for the weekend...
Dirk
- References:
- Puzzled with lockset(?) problem Dirk Zimoch
- RE: Puzzled with lockset(?) problem Mark Engbretson
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: Channel Archiver compilation error Heinz Junkes
- Next:
Re: Puzzled with lockset(?) problem Mooney, Tim M.
- 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: Puzzled with lockset(?) problem Mark Engbretson
- Next:
Re: Puzzled with lockset(?) problem Mooney, Tim M.
- 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
|