EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  <20062007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  <20062007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: RE: GOOD Naming conventions for devices and Epics records
From: "Lawrence T. Hoff" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 22:16:01 -0500

I think what is important in this thread is not what naming convention
is being used at site X, but rather what makes a GOOD naming convention.


Here is what I learned from naming conventions with epics.


1/ I like to know which hardware part is providing the signal.
This provides a tremendous help for low level debugging.
(ex. Signals is from pin 2 on ADC 3 on computer X [located at Y])

2/ End user cares about the meaning of the signal. (ex. Temperature of gun, setting of 3rd magnet in transport line)

3/ PV names are often found hardcoded in programs

4/ Low level and high level programming is managed by 2 different
groups.


Solution:
Use several (two) naming conventions! One for each level and use ALIASING!!!!!



There is clearly a need to maintain both "mission oriented" and
"hardware oriented" mechanisms for referring to channels. The former is
needed for facility operation, and the latter for tasks such as installation,
debug, and maintenance.


   Aliases are not the only way of achieving this. Other alternatives
generally use the "mission oriented" name as a key to lookup the
"hardware oriented" channel description.

   It may be a matter of personal preference which technique seems
most natural. Facilities which make good use of DBs to manage their
H/W configuration might wonder why this is even a subject of
discussion!

   In the absence of a comprehensive configuration DB, the
alias solution seems to offer substantial benefit. Even in the
presence of a configuration DB, the alias solution seems very
natural to me (FWIW).

-- Larry




Navigate by Date:
Prev: RE: Naming conventions for devices and Epics records Purcell, J. David
Next: Error while cross-compiling EPICS for arm éæç
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  <20062007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: RE: Naming conventions for devices and Epics records Purcell, J. David
Next: Error while cross-compiling EPICS for arm éæç
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  <20062007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
ANJ, 02 Sep 2010 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·