Support Forum: Neosoft DQMH TestStandifier

[CyGa]

You could rename your own built PPL.

I never advise to a code module both in LV and TS. If you build a TS UI in LV and call a VI in your sequence that is also used in yout UI, you'll have a collision (VI already reserved by your UI).

It will work as long as you are using the Sequence Editor but not anymore if you build your own TS UI.

[python007]

Hey thanks for your fast reply

I don't want to use the DQMH Module parllel in TestStand and LabVIEW. We develop our Hardware Drivers as DQMH Modules.

And this Modules can be used in TestStand and also in LabVIEW Standalone Applications.

So for this case I need two PPL's?

Best regards

[CyGa]

You could use only one PPL, the one you already build.

But you'll face all caveats described in my presentations.

If you want to tailor a specific experience with TS, then using the TSifier makes it easy to do so.

In that case you would have one PPL for LV and one PPL+seq for TS.

The TSifier does not modify your Main.vi, so everything you tested with LV is left untouched.

[python007]

Hey CyGa

---

@CyGa wrote:

In that case you would have one PPL for LV and one PPL+seq for TS.

---

 So I would try it like you said.

Thanks for your support.

[bienieck]

Ok the termination monitor injection explanation seems reasonable. However, 30 sec timeout is a bad design IMHO. But that is a separate subject.

[CyGa]

30sec ? Which 30sec timeout?

The R&Rd are modified to include the Termination Monitor but the timeout set in the request is kept from the DQMH design. So if you have a 30sec timeout it means you set that value in your design.

[python007]

Hi to all

I have crated succesfuly a new Teststandifier output from my DQMH Module.

I have observed that the source Distribution is still in the output Folder:

The Source Distribution is also listed in the LabView Project.

Is this a normal behavior? Should the Source Distribution and the Buildspecification not be deleted after successfuly  Teststandification?

Best regards

P.S. This thread is getting a litel bit messy. Wouldn't it be better to start new threads for new questions?

[bienieck]

---

@CyGa wrote:

30sec ? Which 30sec timeout?

---

👇

---

@CyGa wrote:

The blocking action is in the request when it is waiting for the response.

If a user decides to modify the timeout for let's say 30sec, then you would have to wait 30sec to actually stop your code module.

Which is not acceptable.

---

[CyGa]

Oh ! That was an example of course.

But yes that 30 sec is a not a very good design.

However, sometimes you have to integrate weird drivers for example. I've seen in the past drivers waiting for an instrument to answer and measurements that literally takes minutes to be done.

When you've got to integrate such drivers, you have to increase your module timeout to match. But in TS that is catastrophic.

That's why we chose to not touch ever the core logic of the module but instead act on the reply waiting mechanism.

[CyGa]

---

@python007  a écrit :

I have observed that the source Distribution is still in the output Folder:

The Source Distribution is also listed in the LabView Project.

Is this a normal behavior? Should the Source Distribution and the Buildspecification not be deleted after successfuly  Teststandification?

---

The source distribution should not be there.
It is normal you see it in the project if not deleted. However this is not the intended behavior.

What I find weird is that last line you see at the top of the log : TestStandifier has stopped. It looks like it encountered a problem.

Do you have admin rights on your PC ?
Maybe something is going wrong when the application is trying to delete 'temporary' files.

---

P.S. This thread is getting a litel bit messy. Wouldn't it be better to start new threads for new questions?

---

I agree ! However NI is not letting us to do this. We only have one forum thread for the tool...