Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

Gerrit Kühn via Tech-talk <tech-talk at aps.anl.gov> · Tue, 5 Dec 2023 17:12:10 +0100

Am Tue, 5 Dec 2023 15:26:16 +0000
schrieb Érico Nogueira Rolim <erico.rolim at lnls.br>:

>  From [1]:
> 
> 
> Passive records are processed when they are referenced by other  
> records through their link fields or when a channel access put is done
> to them.

Um, yes, but the record in question isn't passive, it's I/O Intr. It does
not say "*Only* passive records are processed...".

> A record must be Passive in order to be *processed* (therefore sending
> an event to your camonitor process) when it receives a value write.

I do not understand this from what you quoted. The quote is only on
passive records and says nothing about I/O Intr. Further below it even
says on processing

---
For output links, this option allows a request for remote processing
(side-effects).
none (default) - Make no special request. Uses a server specific default.
false, “NPP” - Request to skip processing.
true, “PP” - Request to force processing.
“CP”, “CPP” - For output links, an alias for “PP”.
---

I even tried that (writing values from a calcout record to the I/O Intr
record using PP), but camonitor did not take notice on that case, either.

> I believe a possible workaround would be an auxiliary record(s), first
> writing the value and then writing to "$record.PROC CA". I know that
> works to force processing for records with periodic scanning, but don't
> remember testing with I/O Intr.

Would that be considered a better/cleaner solution than what I already came
up with (using an auxilary record for I/O Intr and having the actual data
record passive)?

cu
  Gerrit

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System