EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  1997  <19981999  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  1996  1997  <19981999  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: new record support
From: [email protected] (Steve Lewis)
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 13:40:13 -0800
> 
> > 
> > > 	I would prefer to have a single record for the download.  However,
> > > I'm not sure how this fits into epics.  I would like the users to perform  
> > > caputs for each of the parameters.  After all of the parameters have been
> > > filled (each would have a field in the record), the user performs 
> > > another caput to indicate that all of the parameters 
> > > have been filled and the record can process by writing to the
> > > proper vme addresses.   This is where I'm not sure how this fits into
> > > epics.  I only want the record to process (write to port card) once, even
> > > while I am performing caputs -- which as I understand causes the record to
> > > process.
> > 
> > I'd do this with a subroutine record.  The input parameters would go to ao 
> > records, which would hold the paramenters until the subroutine record 
> > processed, but _not_ be out-linked or forward-linked to the subroutine record. 
> > The subroutine record would reference the ao's through the inpa through inpl 
> > fields.  The subroutine record could be made to process by a caput to the PROC 
> > field.  The subroutine code would download the chips based on the input 
> > parameters which would appear in the a-i fields.
> > 
> > 	Carl
> 
> 
> You could eliminate the ao records and write the parameters directly to
> the subRecord.a thru subRecord.i (even initialize them in the database). 
> Although writing values to these fields will cause the record to process,
> your subroutine could be smart enough to not use the data until a 1 was written
> to subRecord.L. Internally, you could keep track of whether you had downloaded
> the parms, so as to do it only once.

But the advantage of the "extra" ao's is they have their own
HI/LO limits, units, other constraints so display widgets and
so forth work well.  The A-L inputs of the sub record are rather
anonymous.

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: new record support Ned Arnold
Next: Re: new record support Tim Mooney
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  <19981999  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: new record support Ned Arnold
Next: Re: new record support Tim Mooney
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  <19981999  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 ·