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  <20142015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  <20142015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: Prioritizing Channel Access per Record?
From: Brian Bevins <[email protected]>
To: Mark Rivers <[email protected]>
Cc: EPICS Techtalk <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 12:30:12 -0400
Hi Mark,

The waveforms are soft records that have their buffers filled by dedicated threads, which then post events to process the records.

I only see the slowdown when a client is connected to the waveforms. Even with the waveform records processing normally, the "fast" records update normally as long as no CA clients monitor the waveforms. I interpreted this to mean that the CA traffic was the bottleneck, but maybe I'm wrong.

Thanks,
--Brian

On 03/18/14 12:23, Mark Rivers wrote:
Are you certain that it is the CA update of the waveform records that is slowing it down, and not the record processing?  if your waveform records are using synchronous device support and they take a long time to process that can slow down all other records.  What type of device support do your waveform records have, synchronous or asynchronous?

Mark


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Bevins
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 10:47 AM
To: EPICS Techtalk
Subject: Prioritizing Channel Access per Record?

Is there any way to specify that CA delivery of updates from certain
records should be prioritized over other records on the same ioc?

I've got an application where a bunch of ai's are processed at 10Hz and
some relatively big (for us) waveforms are processed at about 0.3-0.5
Hz. The ioc is not heavily loaded and all record processing seems to
happen in a timely way, but from the client end (EDM) the "fast" records
all pause for ~0.5 sec whenever the waveforms push out their CA updates.

The ai's are already being processed at a higher priority, but this
doesn't seem to help their updates get pushed out with higher priority.

Is there some tinkering I can do with the priorities of the CA threads
to get what I want? How can I tell which thread will get which record
updates? Is there something more obvious I'm missing?

Thanks,
--Brian



--
Brian S. Bevins, PE
Computer Scientist / Mechanical Engineer
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

     "The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face
      for the urge to rule it."
                                     -- H. L. Mencken


Replies:
Re: Prioritizing Channel Access per Record? Ralph Lange
References:
Prioritizing Channel Access per Record? Brian Bevins
RE: Prioritizing Channel Access per Record? Mark Rivers

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: Prioritizing Channel Access per Record? Brian Bevins
Next: Re: Prioritizing Channel Access per Record? Ralph Lange
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  <20142015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: RE: Prioritizing Channel Access per Record? Mark Rivers
Next: Re: Prioritizing Channel Access per Record? Ralph Lange
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  <20142015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
ANJ, 17 Dec 2015 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·