Thanks Stefan, I would be very interested to see your code. At moment we have magnets and cryostats (3He and dilution) being delivered with Labview.



> > Hello,
> > 
> > Does anyone have experience with writing a MIDAS frontends to communicate with a device that operates using LabView (e.g. superconducting magnets, cryostats etc.). Any information or experience regarding this would be highly appreciated.
> > 
> > thanks,
> > Zaher
> 
> We do have a superconducting magnet from Cryogenic, UK, which comes with a LabView control program on a Windows PC. I did the only reasonable with this: trash it in the waste basket. Do NOT use Labveiw for anything which should run more than 24h in a row. Too many bad experiences with LabView control programs 
> for separators at PSI and other devices. Instead of the Windows PC, we use MSCB devices and RasperryPis to communicate with the power supply directly, which has been proven to be much more stable (running for years without crashes). I'm happy to share our code with you.
> 
> Stefan

Hi,
The question was about the TMFeRpcHandlerInterface, not the TARunObject interface.  Derived classes of TARunObject do indeed work as expected in our 
environment.  We have worked around the issue by using an implementation of TARunObject as well as the (separate) implementation of 
TMFeRpcHandlerInterface.

Thanks,

Mark.

> > I have a manalyzer that uses a derived class of TMFeRpcHandlerInterface to communicate information to 
> > Midas during online running.  At the end of each run it saves out custom data in the 
> > TMFeRpcHandlerInterface::HandleEndRun override. This works really well.
> > However, when I run offline on a Midas output file the HandleEndRun method is never called and my data is 
> > never saved.  Is this intentional?  I understand that there is no point for the HandleBinaryRpc method offline, 
> > but the other methods (HandleEndRun, HandleBeginRun etc) could serve a purpose.  Or is it a conscious 
> > choice to ignore all of TMFeRpcHandlerInterface when offline?
> 
> apologies for delayed response.
> 
> I saw the question, completely did not understand it, only now got around to figure out what is going on.
> 
> according to manalyzer/README.md, section "manalyzer module and object life time", BeginRun() and EndRun() is called 
> always. Offline and online. What you see would be a bug that we do not see in our environment. I confirm this by 
> running manalyzer in a demo mode: ./bin/manalyzer_test.exe  --demo -e10 -t
> 
> no, wait, you say you use HandleBeginRun() and HandleEndRun(). this is not right, they are not part of the manalyzer 
> API and they indeed are only used when running online.
> 
> correct solution would be to use BeginRun() and EndRun() instead of HandleBeginRun() and HandleEndRun().
> 
> you could also save your data in the module destructor (although good programming recommendation is to use 
> destructor only for unavoidable things, like freeing memory, etc).
> 
> K.O.

> The question was about the TMFeRpcHandlerInterface, not the TARunObject interface.  Derived classes of TARunObject do indeed work as expected in our 
> environment.  We have worked around the issue by using an implementation of TARunObject as well as the (separate) implementation of 
> TMFeRpcHandlerInterface.

then I do not understand the question. TMFeRpcHandlerInterface stuff is only used when running online and connected to MIDAS. How does it come into the 
picture when you analyze a data file offline? ProcessMidasOnlineTmfe() does not run, the RpcHandler object is not constructed.

maybe if you point me to your source code, I can see what you are doing?

K.O.

This was exactly the question, should I expect it to run?  There's no point in the HandleBinaryRpc method offline, but there's an argument that the HandleBeginRun/HandleEndRun methods have a use.
I have the answer and we have a workaround, thanks.

> then I do not understand the question. TMFeRpcHandlerInterface stuff is only used when running online and connected to MIDAS. How does it come into the 
> picture when you analyze a data file offline? ProcessMidasOnlineTmfe() does not run, the RpcHandler object is not constructed.
> 
> maybe if you point me to your source code, I can see what you are doing?
> 
> K.O.

I do not understand what you are doing. If you are offline, there is no TMFE singleton instance,
there is nothing TMFeRpcHandlerInterface to attach to, there is nobody to call TMFeRpcHandlerInterface methods.

Maybe what you are asking for is a mode where you analyze data from a file, but you want your analysis code
to think that it is online and that it is analyzing live data. This requires creating a fake TMFE singleton, attaching
TMFeRpcHandlerInterface to this fake TMFE singleton and using ProcessMidasOnlineTmfe(), driven by all this fake stuff:
a fake OpenBuffer() that actually opens a file, a fake ReceiveEvent() that actually reads from a file, fake callbacks
for begin and end run, etc.

That's a lot of work, but for what purpose? What is it about the existing offline and online modes that you do not like
and how all this fake stuff will make it better for you?

P.S. This is a 3rd version of my reply. Wrote and deleted 2 version. I think I completely do not understand
what you are doing and you completely do not understand what I am saying. Communication is not happening.

P.P.S. Simplest if you show me your code (email, elog), I am quite good at reading code and divining what
people are trying to do. You do not have to show me any of your secret secret stuff.

K.O.

> This was exactly the question, should I expect it to run?  There's no point in the HandleBinaryRpc method offline, but there's an argument that the HandleBeginRun/HandleEndRun methods have a use.
> I have the answer and we have a workaround, thanks.
> 
> > then I do not understand the question. TMFeRpcHandlerInterface stuff is only used when running online and connected to MIDAS. How does it come into the 
> > picture when you analyze a data file offline? ProcessMidasOnlineTmfe() does not run, the RpcHandler object is not constructed.
> > 
> > maybe if you point me to your source code, I can see what you are doing?
> > 
> > K.O.

I am updating TWIST to the latest MIDAS and when I load a saved .odb file, I get
these messages. Their text ought to say where and what strings it does not like.
K.O.



[twistonl@midtwist ~/online]$ odbedit
Please define environment variable 'MIDASSYS'
pointing to the midas installation directory.
[local:twist:S]/>load /twist/data_onl/current/run17548.odb
[odb.c:5600:db_paste] found string exceeding MAX_STRING_LENGTH
[odb.c:5600:db_paste] found string exceeding MAX_STRING_LENGTH
[odb.c:5600:db_paste] found string exceeding MAX_STRING_LENGTH

Can you attach 

/twist/data_onl/current/run17548.odb

so I can reproduce the problem?

odbedit command "rename Display xxx/yyy" creates a key named "xxx/yyy" (yes,
with a slash in the name) and this key cannot be deleted or renamed...
K.O.

> odbedit command "rename Display xxx/yyy" creates a key named "xxx/yyy" (yes,
> with a slash in the name) and this key cannot be deleted or renamed...
> K.O.

"rename" is "rename", not "mv" under Unix. If you want this functionality, put it
in and don't complain!

The upgrade of TWIST to the latest midas has bombed- we see mevb and mlogger
crashes during shared memory data buffer accesses. I am looking into it and I
will add information as I figure things out. K.O.

> The upgrade of TWIST to the latest midas has bombed- we see mevb and mlogger
> crashes during shared memory data buffer accesses. I am looking into it and I
> will add information as I figure things out. K.O.

Since 1.9.5 the EventBuilder has been modified. Please consult the documentation
where the new mevb scheme is explained.
Test of the mevb with up to 16 frontends (15 different CPUs) has been tested
successfully. Data rate at the EventBuilder were measured about 50MB/s without the
logger and ~30MB/s with the logger.

> The upgrade of TWIST to the latest midas has bombed- we see mevb and mlogger
> crashes during shared memory data buffer accesses. I am looking into it and I
> will add information as I figure things out. K.O.

I traced buffer memory corruption to a logic error in system.c::ss_shm_open(). If
a .SHM file exists, it's size is used as the size of the sysv shared memory
segment, even if the requested shared memory size is bigger, but the caller of
ss_shm_open()  thinks it got all the requested memory. Eventually we try to use
the unallocated memory and crash. This is the proposed fix and I will commit it
after I retest the upgrade during the next few days.

[olchansk@send src]$ cvs diff -u system.c
olchansk@midas.psi.ch's password: 
Index: system.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/midas/src/system.c,v
retrieving revision 1.83
diff -u -r1.83 system.c
--- system.c    4 Oct 2004 07:04:01 -0000       1.83
+++ system.c    14 Oct 2004 05:51:16 -0000
@@ -544,8 +544,14 @@
       } else {
          /* if file exists, retrieve its size */
          file_size = (INT) ss_file_size(file_name);
-         if (file_size > 0)
+         if (file_size > 0) {
+            if (file_size < size) {
+               cm_msg(MERROR, "ss_shm_open", "Shared memory segment \'%s\' size
%d is smaller than requested size %d. Please remove it and try
again",file_name,file_size,size);
+               return SS_NO_MEMORY;
+            }
+            
             size = file_size;
+         }
       }
 
       /* get the shared memory, create if not existing */

K.O.

> > The upgrade of TWIST to the latest midas has bombed- we see mevb and mlogger
> > crashes during shared memory data buffer accesses. I am looking into it and I
> > will add information as I figure things out. K.O.
> 
> Since 1.9.5 the EventBuilder has been modified. Please consult the documentation
> where the new mevb scheme is explained.
> Test of the mevb with up to 16 frontends (15 different CPUs) has been tested
> successfully. Data rate at the EventBuilder were measured about 50MB/s without the
> logger and ~30MB/s with the logger.

It turns out that TWIST uses a private mevb.c. We will consider upgrading to the
standard one.

K.O.

Agree.

Once you did the modification, please check following situation: Create a fresh
ODB withe increased size ("odbedit -s 2000000" for example). Then check that the
other clients "adopt" this increased size. Note that some experiments need a
bigger ODB, and I don't want to have them recompile all clients, that's why the
code in ss_shm_open() can attach to a *larger* shared memory. However, it should
not matter to the process, since the ODB (or SYSTEM) shared memory size is
stored in the pheader->key_size and pheader->data_size of each participating
process. So they should never write beyond the limits defined in that header.
The size to ss_shm_open() is only a "hint" if the shared memory does not exist,
and is nowhere later used in the code.

With latest midas, I see this:

Thu Oct 14 19:31:17 2004 [Lazy_Tape] [lazylogger.c:1717:Lazy] lazy_file_exists
file run17567.ybs doesn't exists
Thu Oct 14 19:31:27 2004 [Lazy_Tape] [lazylogger.c:1717:Lazy] lazy_file_exists
file run17567.ybs doesn't exists

The file run17567.ybs has size zero:

-rw-r--r--    1 twistonl users      950272 Oct 13 19:29
/twist/data_onl/current/run17565.ybs
-rw-r--r--    1 twistonl users      950272 Oct 13 19:45
/twist/data_onl/current/run17566.ybs
-rw-r--r--    1 twistonl users           0 Oct 13 20:00
/twist/data_onl/current/run17567.ybs
-rw-r--r--    1 twistonl users      983040 Oct 13 20:03
/twist/data_onl/current/run17568.ybs
-rw-r--r--    1 twistonl users      950272 Oct 13 20:26
/twist/data_onl/current/run17569.ybs

I am not sure how to fix this lazylogger logic. Please help.

K.O.

> The upgrade of TWIST to the latest midas has bombed- we see mevb and mlogger
> crashes during shared memory data buffer accesses. I am looking into it and I
> will add information as I figure things out. K.O.

On second try, it looks like we are in business- the first try did not work
because of two mistakes:

1) I did not delete *all* old .SHM files (.ODB.SHM, .SYSTEM.SHM, .YBUF1.SHM,
.YBUF2.SHM). I deleted ODB.SHM, so odb worked, but forgot about the data buffers
SYSTEM.SHM & co and ended up with segmentation faults and core dumps in the buffer
management code caused by a mismatch of the old-midas buffers and new-midas code.
2) while debugging these core dumps, I made an error in my test code, so even
after I deleted the old data buffers, things still did not work. Talk about
over-debugging a problem...

K.O.

The current h1_book() macros (and the previous example analyzer code) have an
odd persistency problem: for example, the user wants to change some histogram
limits, edits the h1_book() calls, rebuilds and restarts the analyzer, starts a
new run, and observes that all histograms are filled using the old limits, his
changes "did not take". The user panics, I get paged during the Holy Lunch Hour,
everybody is unhappy.

This is what I think happens:

1) analyzer starts
2) LoadRootHistgrams() loads old histograms from file
3) user code calls h1_book()
4) h1_book template in midas.h does this (roughly):
      hist = (TH1X *) gManaHistosFolder->FindObjectAny(name);
      if (hist == NULL) {
         hist = new TH1X(name, title, bins, min, max);
5) since the histogram already exists (loaded from the file, with the old
limits), the TH1X constructor is not called at all, new histogram limits are
utterly ignored.

A possible solution is to unconditionally create the ROOT objects, like I do in
the example code posted at http://dasdevpc.triumf.ca:9080/Midas/191. That code
produces an annoying warning from ROOT about possible memory leaks. This could
be fixed by adding a two liner to "find and delete" the object before it is
created, trippling the number of user code lines per histogram (find & delete,
then create). Highly ugly.

midas.h macros (h1_book & co) can be fixed by adding checks for histogram limits
and such, but I would much prefer a generic solution/convention that would work
for arbitrary ROOT objects without MIDAS-specific wrappers (think TProfile,
TGraph, etc...).

Any suggestions?

K.O.

> The current h1_book() macros (and the previous example analyzer code) have an
> odd persistency problem: for example, the user wants to change some histogram
> limits, edits the h1_book() calls, rebuilds and restarts the analyzer, starts a
> new run, and observes that all histograms are filled using the old limits, his
> changes "did not take". The user panics, I get paged during the Holy Lunch Hour,
> everybody is unhappy.
> 
> This is what I think happens:
> 
> 1) analyzer starts
> 2) LoadRootHistgrams() loads old histograms from file

I can't get onto cvs@midas.psi.ch right now
(cvs update
cvs@midas.psi.ch's password: 
Permission denied, please try again.)

but when I changed LoadRootHistograms a few days ago I left it as:

    } else if (obj->InheritsFrom( "TH1")) {

      // still don't know how to do TH1s

so h1_book() is creating the first and only copy of the histograms.
I am able to create new histogram limits.
I don't get the memory leak problems.

However I have seen the memory leak problems before, and they are real.
They must be dealt with either by (1) first deleteing the old histogram
or (2) ensuring that histogram names are unique in the whole application
(different modules/folders can not use the same histogram names).

I will return to this once I can do a cvs update for midas.

John.

> 3) user code calls h1_book()
> 4) h1_book template in midas.h does this (roughly):
>       hist = (TH1X *) gManaHistosFolder->FindObjectAny(name);
>       if (hist == NULL) {
>          hist = new TH1X(name, title, bins, min, max);
> 5) since the histogram already exists (loaded from the file, with the old
> limits), the TH1X constructor is not called at all, new histogram limits are
> utterly ignored.
> 
> A possible solution is to unconditionally create the ROOT objects, like I do in
> the example code posted at <a
href="http://dasdevpc.triumf.ca:9080/Midas/191">http://dasdevpc.triumf.ca:9080/Midas/191</a>.
That code
> produces an annoying warning from ROOT about possible memory leaks. This could
> be fixed by adding a two liner to "find and delete" the object before it is
> created, trippling the number of user code lines per histogram (find & delete,
> then create). Highly ugly.
> 
> midas.h macros (h1_book & co) can be fixed by adding checks for histogram limits
> and such, but I would much prefer a generic solution/convention that would work
> for arbitrary ROOT objects without MIDAS-specific wrappers (think TProfile,
> TGraph, etc...).
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> K.O.

> I can't get onto cvs@midas.psi.ch right now
> (cvs update
> cvs@midas.psi.ch's password: 
> Permission denied, please try again.)

I had to upgrade midas.psi.ch today with Scientific Linux 3.03. Most things are back to work, but
 I failed to do the anonymous CVS account. I have to wait for next week when the experts are
there. I will let you know when it's working again.

- Stefan

> > I can't get onto cvs@midas.psi.ch right now
> > (cvs update
> > cvs@midas.psi.ch's password: 
> > Permission denied, please try again.)

cvs@midas.psi.ch should be up and running again.