Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support digital alarm blocks #61

Open
cnlklink opened this issue Jun 8, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Support digital alarm blocks #61

cnlklink opened this issue Jun 8, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@cnlklink
Copy link
Contributor

cnlklink commented Jun 8, 2023

Right now only ACNET analog alarms are support. Extend support to digital alarms.

@cnlklink cnlklink added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 8, 2023
@beauremus
Copy link
Member

This is new functionality for the parameter page. This is currently handled in a separate application.
Just documenting for context.

@rneswold
Copy link
Contributor

rneswold commented Jun 9, 2023

More documentation/brainstorming:

A digital alarm block gets downloaded to the front-end. It gets routed by the SSDN associated with it in the database.

  • In all my drivers, the digital alarm has the same SSDN and NODE as the basic control property.
  • It is possible that the digital alarm has a different SSDN.
  • It is also possible that the digital alarm has a different NODE.

The parameter page would have to set up a (very slow) periodic read of the digital alarm block (to adapt when new settings are downloaded to it) as well as a periodic read of the device that is truly reading the status for it.

The param page would get the status and do the bit-twiddling to see if it's in alarm.

I think part of the GraphQL get_device_info reply should have a field that holds the device that returns the status used by the digital alarm.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants