Page 2 of 2

Re: Patching MTX for our use

Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:31 pm
by EssEss
not sure if this also sounds too simpistic, this is how I handle streaming vs polling (simultaneously) in my own code:

1) every msgs going out gets 'tagged' and waits for the response coming back with a matching 'tag' - if timeout the originator gets notified and then it gets pulled off the waiting list and goes on a backburner list - so I can pull it later for debug or dump it to log .. usually this means that I don't have support for the command in my firmware :)

2) anything that doesn't have a matching tag (most likely a streamed msg) gets delegated out to whoever wants to get a shot at parsing it .. this also allows me to dump to log too. think observer + chain of responsibility.

the above also lets me run different streams at different rates without increasing bandwidth needs. I can stream things like clt temp every 1s without having it get streamed in another higher freq stream.

the above also has other infrastructure required .. most of which I left out. I'll look over mtx code too.

Re: Patching MTX for our use

Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:24 pm
by Fred
Yeah, something like that is perfect, i think. Nicely articulated too.

I don't think we'll have resources to do different streams interleaved. what we will have is the ability to filter the data sent back to a required subset in some fashion. thought out, but not quite implemented yet.

Fred.

Re: Patching MTX for our use

Posted: Fri May 07, 2010 8:29 pm
by dandruczyk
Sounds good to me, though since MS doesn't use this model (and MtX support MS still) it would probably need to be a compile time option, or a runtime setting to enable this sort of behavior. IT sounds good and I like the interleaving ability and the ability to provide feeds that other software could plugin to (logger, etc)


--
David A.

Re: Patching MTX for our use

Posted: Fri May 07, 2010 8:47 pm
by Fred
Runtime option sounds a lot more attractive than having to have two mtx installs and downloads and and and if you happen to have customers or friends with both ms and FreeEMS. Somewhere I drew up a thing on how to do the discovery/interrogation without affecting the other platform. Maybe I should find it and link it here.

Fred.

Re: Patching MTX for our use

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:17 pm
by dandruczyk
Fred wrote:MTX = C++
MLV = NON-FREE Java

I don't mind mlv and use it, but I know a few of our members are very anti it for a number of reasons.

Bzzt!!, Mtx == C NOT C++

-- David

Re: Patching MTX for our use

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:11 pm
by Fred
Fixed

Re: Patching MTX for our use

Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:52 am
by Fred
Nearly three years after the start of this thread, it is starting to come to reality, woo hoo :-)

Fred.