10-01-2018 01:01 PM
Hi again,
Does anyone know if there is a way to discard one or more results from within the entry point, "Model Plugin - OnTheFly Step Results?"
I'm trying to find functionality analogous to Parameters.DiscardResult in SequencefilePostResultListEntry.
Thanks very much,
Mr. Jim
Solved! Go to Solution.
10-02-2018 06:37 PM
Hi Mr_Jim
I did not find detailed information regarding this but I was wondering if it is necessary for you to discard the results specifically from the plugin?
Additionally, do you want to discard all the results from a step or just specific results?
Thanks in advance for the information.
Regards,
Astromaut
10-03-2018 03:40 PM
Hi Astromaut,
Here's some context:
We have a really long temperature soak test during which we only want to report failed steps - otherwise we get copious amounts of data that isn't useful. Under normal circumstances we always want to log test results, but this is an exception. Therefore we toggle this functionality on and off during our test, recording all results before the soak, filtering during the soak, and then recording all results again afterward.
I'm using a model plugin that executes before all other plugins to house all of our model customizations. (I don't actually modify any NI models, but there are substantial customizations in the plugin.) The model plugin uses the OTF entry point to iterate over results, filter them, attach things to them, etc. No actual report processing is done in this entry point - I'm merely using it to gain access to the results at run-time.
In the past we added SequenceFilePostResultListEntry steps in the client sequence so as to discard non-failing results during the soak. The problem is that my model plugin's OTF entry point executes before SequenceFilePostResultListEntry, so by the time we discard results in SequenceFilePostResultListEntry it's already too late because the OTF entry point has already executed.
I somewhat painfully coded around this in the following manner:
It sounds like there is no real way to do this natively, so that's what I'm going with.
Hopefully I explained this somewhat coherently? I tried.
Mr. Jim
10-16-2018 01:09 PM
Hi Mr_Jim
Thank you very much for the explanation and my apologies for not replying sooner. I was looking for more information but unfortunately, I did not find a more straightforward way to have this functionality on the fly. Did you found something additional on your end?
Your approach, even though is time-consuming sounds like a good workaround.
I will keep looking for more insight.
Tallest Regards,
Astromaut
10-17-2018 07:42 AM
Hi Astromaut,
Thanks for your reply. As far as I'm aware, the workaround is still functioning well on our end.
Given that it appears there's nothing more straightforward to try, it's going to remain our solution.
I appreciate your looking into it, but at this point please don't feel like you have to spend any more time on it.
Kind regards,
Mr. Jim