Correct.

I don't know how large your network is, but there are issues with the DS2409.

Basically, we trigger "branch selection" in the most efficient manner, but owfs
is designed to be multiuser (or at least multiprocessing) which means another
thread may have selected away from the DS2409. This is no problem for reading or
writing, but the datasheet says some "presence alarms" may be lost. The alarms
state of chips on the branch should be preserved.

We can work on enhancing the full function, but I'd do some extensive testing to
make sure you don't get locked out.

The DS2409 certainly partitions the network, but it adds its own inefficiencies.
Selecting any branch involves considerable communication.

If you only want to reduce the number of chips that need to be scanned, and you
have an appropriate network design, you can simply add more bus-masters. owfs
can address them individually or in a unified manner, and searches on them are
multithreaded and concurrent.

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Jan Kandziora
Sent: Wed 5/31/2006 4:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Owfs-developers] DS2409 -- Smart-On or Direct-On
 
Am Mittwoch, 31. Mai 2006 22:06 schrieb Paul Alfille:
> A. smart on
> B. I don't know.
>
So reading the $DS2409_ID/main/uncached directory will just trigger the search 
on the main subnetwork, instead of the entire network?

        Jan
-- 
1) Never draw what you can copy.
2) Never copy what you can trace.
3) Never trace what you can cut out and paste down.


-------------------------------------------------------
All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk!
Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in
the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Owfs-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/owfs-developers

<<winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to