Hi John,
On 2011-09-08 Benjamin Franksen wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2011, um 22:10:10 schrieb John Dobbins:
> > I am wondering about the time-stamp for a record with asynchronous
> > device support. Does the time-stamp indicate the time processing started
> > or completed. (I am guessing the later but wanted to be sure.)
>
> The precise answer is: it depends on the record type (look into the source
> code of record support to find out). However, all record types that I know
> of set the timestamp after calling device support for the second time, so
> for all practical purposes the answer is: yes, the latter.
It also depends on the TSEL and TSE fields, which can cause the timestamp to
be fetched from another record (if you point TSEL to another record's .TIME
field), an event system (set TSE or point TSEL to a numeric field giving the
event number) or assume that device support has set the timestamp itself (set
TSE to -2).
- Andrew
--
Optimization is the process of taking something that works and
replacing it with something that almost works, but costs less.
-- Roger Needham
- References:
- Time-Stamp for Asynchronous records John Dobbins
- Re: Time-Stamp for Asynchronous records Benjamin Franksen
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: Time-Stamp for Asynchronous records Benjamin Franksen
- Next:
Need std 2.9 to build mca Bruce Hill
- 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:
Re: Time-Stamp for Asynchronous records Benjamin Franksen
- Next:
Need std 2.9 to build mca Bruce Hill
- 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
|