Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

"Jeff Hill" <[email protected]> · Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:35:47 -0600

> 3. I don't know that the maintainers of EPICS fully endorse CAJ.
>    I think it would be great if they did, but there may be some feeling
>    that the CA protocol should only be implemented as provided in EPICS
>    base, and any other language support should be implemented with
>    bindings into the native CA library rather than a separate
>    implementing of the CA protocol in that other language.

It's a very good experience from a perspective of protocol robustness to
have multiple implementations. In general mixing multiple implementations on
the same network is fine. After we get through an initial deployment period
I am going to predict that our biggest concern might be that in large
systems we have to be careful about congestion feedback, and that this might
be slightly harder to debug, but probably not unmanageable either. Its
managements call whether its cost effective to maintain more than one
version or not, but we have learned that healthy competition, and an
opportunity for new ideas, seem to make up for any loss of productivity due
to redundant efforts within open source developments.

PS: Have a look at Mantis 268, which might also apply to R3.13 IOCs, if you
deploy CAJ on your EPICS network.

Jeff

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System