Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

[email protected] (Rozelle Wright) · Thu, 26 Oct 95 14:06:33 MDT

> From [email protected] Thu Oct 26 12:15:35 1995
> Return-Path: <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 95 11:13:35 PDT
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Subroutine record input fields don't get archived
> Content-Length: 354
> X-Lines: 12
> 
> Re; Marty's proposal:
> 
> > If we are going to have a new general purpose subroutine record then I would
> > like to suggest one of the following.
> 
> [Two items deleted]
> 
> I have wanted a more general subroutine record.  Let's find a time to
> brainstorm over the 7-8 working days coming up in Chicago.  Marty's
> ideas seem like a good place to start.
> 
> Steve Lewis
> 
I won't be at the meeting, but would you please add the following to
any brainstorming session.   
I would like record processing code to provide the capability of archiving
any field which is capable of being monitored.  
This goes back to the original question which 
started this thread of discussion. It was very confusing to see monitored
values change on the operator screen when they did not change in the archived
snapshots.
In that example Marty's suggestion of the change to db_post in the
section of code that posts monitors for the psub->a,psub->b...
to
db_post_events(psub,pnew,monitor_mask|DBE_VALUE|DBE_LOG) would do
this for the current version of subroutine records.
Rozelle Wright

---------------------------------------------------------
|                                                       |
|Rozelle Wright              Phone (505) 667-4804       |
|Los Alamos Natl Labs AOT-8  FAX (505) 665-5107         |
|PO Box 1663 MS-H820         Group Office (505) 667-6087|
|Los Alamos, NM 87545        email : [email protected]   |
|                                                       |
---------------------------------------------------------

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System