Re: [foxboro] system error in sequences
- From: Terry Doucet <doucet427@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:34:50 -0400
I agree with the WAIT statements. Perhaps 3 in a row will work most of the
time but there could be cases where the Connectionless GET or SET occurs when
some other activity is going on like a SHRINK, UPLOAD or CHECKPOINT and you
still might fail with a limit of 3 in a row.
I always told my programmers that 2 per second was the limit - for the network
- and if you had more than one CP with sequence code and since CP's are not
synchronized, you could exceed the 2 per second limit. So I suggested 1 per
second in any sequence code and we never ran into the problem of failure to
make the connectionless data GET or SET. I suspect the error is -1 .
Terry
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
Other related posts:
