EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  <19961997  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  Index 1994  1995  <19961997  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 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: fallback CA servers?
From: [email protected] (William Lupton)
To: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 3 May 96 08:28:51 HST
Dear all,

  Thanks to Steven, Jeff and Andrew for their replies. I guess I _knew_
that if I mentioned the reason for the question then I would get
comments on the proposed application too! Thanks for those, and yes, of
course one would have to be very careful at the switchover point.

Andrew said:
> If you know that the Unix CA server will always be running, you could 
> always have the Unix server reflect PVs from the IOC into a different 
> namespace, and have all your clients attach to the Unix names and never to 
> the original IOC names.  This way the Unix server knows exactly when it 
> needs to be a simulator (because it gets connect and disconnect messages 
> from the IOC), and the clients couldn't care less if an IOC gets turned 
> off because they're never talking directly to it. There will be a 
> performance hit here of course, but for slow records it shouldn't matter.

  This is close to the existing non-EPICS system that we are trying to
emulate.  Things are a lot easier if all control and status flows
through a single point in both simulate and non-simulate modes because
the simulate mode can be a single global flag at that single point. I
was wondering whether there was a solution which still allowed clients
to connect directly to the online system.

  In conclusion, Jeff points out that to support this sort of thing in
CA would probably require a protocol change (perhaps not a major one?)
and this is unlikely to happen. I think that we are likely, in
_decreasing_ order of probability, to:

1. change the requirements (e.g. handle simulation mode on a per-client
   basis and not support automatic rollover)

2. go for a hybrid system (e.g. use a Unix server at remote sites and
   use existing IOC-based simulation facilities at the telescope)

3. go for a scheme like the one that Andrew suggests

  William


Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: fallback CA servers? Andrew Johnson
Next: Re: fallback CA servers? Ned Arnold
Index: 1994  1995  <19961997  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: fallback CA servers? Andrew Johnson
Next: Re: fallback CA servers? Ned Arnold
Index: 1994  1995  <19961997  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 
ANJ, 10 Aug 2010 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·