How come you can not use more than 126GB of a 1.5TB diskdrive with LabVIEW Real Time?

[kmcdevitt]

---

billko wrote:

It's one thing to be ignorant; it's quite another to be ignorant at the top of your lungs.  I read the document that you pointed everyone to and it says:

Phar Lap ETS, the real-time operating system used by the LabVIEW andLabWindows/CVI Real-Time Modules on RT Desktop PC targets, can causedisk corruption when accessing disk sectors beyond the first 128 GiB¹ of a drive.

---

Yes my ignorance, apparently, was indeed that I was so ignorantly “at the top of my lungs”.  I apologize again, it was not intended to be yelling, I was just using a nice legible font and size for my 30 inch monitor.  The individual 2560x1600 pixels are a wee bit smaller.  Thanks go to you and others for educating me on this.  To me my responses, ignoring the content, spelling, and grammar, look fine.  I have no idea how big the fonts ended up on your browser/monitor.  Please accept my sincerest apologies.  I have learned how to “Paste and Match Style” to avoid this in the future.

---

billko wrote:

Loosely translated, it means that LabVIEW R/T is running on top of the Phar Lap ETS operating system that (presumably) they licensed from Phar Lap (now IntervalZero).  It most plainly states that it is a limitation of the operating system, which is the case most of the time you run into limitations like this.  It's like blaming a car manufacturer for not equipping your minivan with VR-rated tires that are safe up to speeds of 150 mph, only it's not so simple to fix as buying a new set of tires.

---

You are correct of course.  However, I am having difficulty with you analogy.  If the car companies refused to make cars capable of running on the federally mandated unleaded gasoline, then at some point they would not be allowed to sell their cars.  At that point, end of car company.  The “fix” was not simple, but they adapted.  This is not a sudden problem and was not unforeseen.  Drives larger than 126GB have been around for about 6 or7 years.

---

billko wrote:

As far as I can see, Phar Lap ETS was developed to have as small a footprint as possible, probably so it can fit onto something like a ROM.  Since real time operating systems are meant to "work in small places," I doubt you'll ever see an upgrade to include support for bigger hard drives.  It's amazing it supports hard drives as big as 126 GB, since most likely it would be R/W from a flash card or something.

---

I like the small foot print.  However, I suspect LabVIEW RT will become more capable with more happy features as it get better and better too.  Applications will always require more and more memory for the software, and more and more storage to store our perceived treasures of data.  I don’t think the choice of planned stagnation and obsolescence is wise.  Meanwhile, Moore’s Law is a also happy friend to flash cards.

---

billko wrote:

references:

http://www.intervalzero.com/ets.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_operating_system

Bill

---

Bill,

Thanks for the scoop on intervalzero, I was unaware.

Is’nt wikipedia wonderful.

Kevin.

[kmcdevitt]

 

---

Original Coq Rouge quote:
Ravens Fan You should not bother. For me the comments from kmcdevitt is like a X in a Karnaugh map. It also funny that that  the spell checker suggested kmcdevitt replaced with checkmated. Accidental circumstance, nope I do not think so. Meanwhile on my workplace we have a bet going on. How large fonts will kmcdevitt use next time. Pleace do not let me down kmcdevitt

---

  

---

Corrected Coq Rouge quote:
Ravens Fan You should not bother. For me the comments from kmcdevitt is like an X in a Karnaugh map. It is also funny that that the spell checker suggested kmcdevitt be replaced with checkmated. Accidental circumstance?  Nope, I do not think so. Meanwhile, at my workplace, we have a bet going on. How large of a font will kmcdevitt use next time? Pleace do not let us down kmcdevitt.

---

Coq Rouge,

Thanks for your input and insight.  I have fixed your grammar and spelling.

I appologize for the apparent "Yelling", it was unintentional, and was do to my ignorance about appropriate font sizes and styles that are appropriate in discussion forums.

I like your Karnaugh map analogy.  It appears to be right on the target in this case.

Kevin. 

[kmcdevitt]

---

TMC-NI wrote:

Kevin,

Your local field rep here, Tolga.  From the Pharlap/ETS website:  http://www.pharlap.com/ETSPatches.htm

"Monitor 1-14 Dated 1/29/2009:  Previously, when the ETS software attempted to boot from a single-partition FAT 32 disk larger than 127 GB, the attempt failed. This update resolves this problem and can boot from single-partition FAT 32 disks up to 2 Terrabytes in size."

Pharlap fixed the issue in January 29th, 2009.  LabVIEW Real-Time 8.6.1 was released in beginning of January 2009, therefore NI was not able to acquire the ETS 14.0 Update in time.

The issue should now be resolved with the release of LabVIEW RT 2009.  However, I will confirm that this is the case and let you know.

Regards,

Tolga Cengiz

Field Sales Engineer - Northern California

National Instruments

---

YES!

GOD BLESS AMERICA.

(Or GOD SAVE THE QUEEN, if your spouse is from England.)

Thank you Tolga for a Real Response with realy useful updated information and Real fixes to an unimagined problem.  Thank you Tolga and NI and Phar Labs and Interval and everybody.

Kevin.

Note:  Sometimes there is something to scream about. Is it not a wonderful world.

[Dennis_Knutson · Accepted solution]

At the risk of pouring gasoline on a smoldering fire, you are still an unmitigated a**hole. Everyone was telling you from the very beginning that the but/problem was with the RTOS and you kept insisting on calling it a bug with LabVIEW. I don't for a minute believe your comments about the font size and colors in your rants.

[billko]

Hey, much to my chagrin, I guess they DID fix it.  Remind me that you're not the only loudmouth here.  I just don't use as big a font as you.

[Coq_Rouge]

---

Dennis Knutson wrote: 
........ you are still an unmitigated a**hole.

---

I think most of the unmitigated a**holes out there, would take that comment as an insult of theirs profession

Message Edited by Coq Rouge on 08-05-2009 11:12 AM

[Intaris]

---

kmcdevitt wrote:

 

---

Original Coq Rouge quote:
Ravens Fan You should not bother. For me the comments from kmcdevitt is like a X in a Karnaugh map. It also funny that that  the spell checker suggested kmcdevitt replaced with checkmated. Accidental circumstance, nope I do not think so. Meanwhile on my workplace we have a bet going on. How large fonts will kmcdevitt use next time. Pleace do not let me down kmcdevitt

---

  

---

Corrected Coq Rouge quote:
Ravens Fan You should not bother. For me the comments from kmcdevitt is like an X in a Karnaugh map. It is also funny that that the spell checker suggested kmcdevitt be replaced with checkmated. Accidental circumstance?  Nope, I do not think so. Meanwhile, at my workplace, we have a bet going on. How large of a font will kmcdevitt use next time? Pleace do not let us down kmcdevitt.

---

Coq Rouge,

Thanks for your input and insight.  I have fixed your grammar and spelling.

I appologize for the apparent "Yelling",. it It was unintentional, and was due to my ignorance about appropriate (redundant)font sizes and styles that are appropriate in discussion forums.

I like your Karnaugh map analogy.  It appears to be right on the target in this case.

Kevin. 

---

Fixing someone's grammar and spelling in a post with grammar and spelling mistakes is somehow typical for this thread.

Shane.

[kmcdevitt]

---

Dennis Knutson wrote:
At the risk of pouring gasoline on a smoldering fire, you are still an unmitigated a**hole. Everyone was telling you from the very beginning that the but/problem was with the RTOS and you kept insisting on calling it a bug with LabVIEW. I don't for a minute believe your comments about the font size and colors in your rants.

---

Dennis,

After some soul searching, which did not take very long, I believe that I deserve your comment in your first sentence.  I will make an honest attempt in the future to be better.  Time will have the be the judge of that.

The whole point that I was apparently unable to get across is that RealTime LabVIEW is both the Language and the OS that it runs on.  You don't get one without the other. When we buy LabVIEW RealTime it comes with the RTOS.  They are both purchased by us from National Instruments.  They are both National Instruments products with NI Part Numbers.  If NI sells them together, then they should attempt fix them when there is such a critical bug.

My comments regarding font size were genuine, however, having said that, it was also a genuine rant. 

I started the discussions asking for other peoples inputs on whether or not NI should get that disk corruption bug fixed and support drives larger than 126GB.

I find it amazing that none of you could even find it within yourselves to even vote to have it fixed.

Maybe everybody needs to do some of their own soul searching, and get beyond font sizes.

Kevin. 

[kmcdevitt]

---

billko wrote:
Hey, much to my chagrin, I guess they DID fix it.  Remind me that you're not the only loudmouth here.  I just don't use as big a font as you.

---

 

Billko,

Sorry again for being a loud mouth.  I am trying to be better.

Kevin. 

[Dennis_Knutson]

Okay. I think my point of view was a little different. While NI does sell the OS as part of the RT package, I never believed that the bug in the reading of large disk drives was something serious enough to matter to the large majority of RT users and I have some large doubts over how much influence NI has over Vxworks. I previously worked at a place where Vxworks was embedded in all of the products and even with many magnitudes greater of an installed base, the influence to correct bugs or add features was relatively slight.

I'm glad that Vxworks has finally addressed the issue.