Steven Hunt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the example below should the second record be processed ? (epics 3.14.4)
>
> record(calc, "DEV:1") {
> field(PINI, "YES")
> field(CALC, "42")
> field(FLNK, "DEV:2.PROC CA")
> }
>
> record(calc, "DEV:2") {
> field(CALC, "42")
> }
>
> Thanks
> Steve
Hi Steven.
the problem is that a channel access put fails at PINI time.
Processing the first record afterwards will cause the second record
to properly process, too.
Is think this is a feature, not a bug. A record should not be accessible
by channel access before it is initialized. Otherwise all clients could see the
uninitialized values of the records.
Andreas
- References:
- CA FLNK Steven Hunt
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
CA FLNK Steven Hunt
- Next:
Re: process function of record waveform and CA (caput, caget) Ben-chin K. Cha
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
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:
CA FLNK Steven Hunt
- Next:
scanRecord for 3.14 Marty Kraimer
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
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
|