EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

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  <20232024  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  <20232024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: question
From: japanisverylittle--- via Tech-talk <tech-talk at aps.anl.gov>
To: anj <anj at anl.gov>
Cc: tech-talk <tech-talk at aps.anl.gov>
Date: Sat, 06 May 2023 00:41:20 +0800
Yes, your answer is very clear. thank you.


Hi Tomas,

On 5/5/23 11:18 AM, japanisverylittle--- via Tech-talk wrote:
how to explain this? Why does Input_1 run twice at 10 Hz?
The original intention was to show an example where two records with SCAN=.1 second (i.e. Output_1 and Calculation_2) would both ask for the Input_1 record to process using the PP (Process Passive) mechanism that record links provide, thus Input_1 would be triggered twice in every 10Hz cycle.

However there is a mistake in the diagram; the Output_1.DOL link needs to be marked with the PP flag but as drawn it is flagged with NPP instead, so as drawn the Output_1 record will never actually  request the Calculation_1 record to be processed at all, thus the Input_1 record will only process at 10Hz.

Was that what you were asking?

- Andrew
-- 
Complexity is free, it's Simplicity that takes work.

References:
question japanisverylittle--- via Tech-talk
Re: question Andrew Johnson via Tech-talk

Navigate by Date:
Prev: timestampField not retrieved using CA provider for pvac::ClientChannel Bisegni, Claudio via Tech-talk
Next: Re: timestampField not retrieved using CA provider for pvac::ClientChannel Veseli, Sinisa via Tech-talk
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  <20232024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Re: question Andrew Johnson via Tech-talk
Next: timestampField not retrieved using CA provider for pvac::ClientChannel Bisegni, Claudio via Tech-talk
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  <20232024 
ANJ, 05 May 2023 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·