Which is better between Wait (ms) and wait until next ms multiple when input is 1 ms

[alexderjuengere · Accepted solution]

---

@edmonton wrote:

Hi Alex,

Thanks.

I had high resolution relative second VI in my program already for timing the software-timed data acquisition loop, it is one of the time functions included in my LB2015. It is different from high resolution polling wait VI, which is not included in Vi library of LB2015. I will test my program more for stability check.

Regards,

Gu

---

I forgot "high resolution relative seconds" was included in labview 2015 - but if you have access to it, you can use it to code your own "high resolution polling wait vi"

and I also forgot to attach the actual code, using kernel32.dll to mimic "high resolution relative seconds" -

for completness, I attach it here

[edmonton]

Hi Alex,

Thank you so much.

I tried it out, it occupies 36% cpu, keeping my computer cup fan running all time while it is in progress. 

It is good for a short data acquisition application, but is not good for an online continuous application, it would burn the cpu down in a month. My application is 30-60 minutes at a time and then change test sample and run it again, hence, I could use it. 

Gu

[altenbach]

It uses 100% of one CPU core, so your 36% is a meaningless metric. CPUs can be run at 100% forever. They know their temperature and will automatically lower the clock frequency to remain in the allowed thermal envelope.

[edmonton]

Hi Altenbach,

The 36% CPU usage was obtained from window task manger when the high resolution polling wait vi was running. The CPU usage dropped to 4% after it stopped. 

I tried to run the VI for 30 minutes, which is the minimum duration required for my application and 36% CPU usage was stable, CPU fan kept spinning all the time. 

Regards,

Gu