Hi Mike,

Was just wondering if you could send me the mote code you used for testing
127 bytes @ 100Hz. That way i can figure out of its a host problem or my
mote implementation.

Much Thanks,

Nick

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Nicholas Hosein <[email protected]>wrote:

> Thanks guys. I am using bluez on linux for my bt host code. The reason i
> thought it was the mote code was because one mote would drop off at a time
> while the others would be displayed on the host fine. Also the motes can
> receive packets from the host even after the problem takes effect. The
> problem occurs more frequently as i 1) increase the number of motes, 2)
> request different data from the mote in addition to the 102 bytes are
> streaming at 10Hz, 3) I use the lab microwave which interferes with
> bluetooth (it kills my bt mouse and keyboard quite often).
>
> I do agree though that the motes should be able to function fine under
> these conditions. Ill take a closer look at my code and get back to you
> guys.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Phil Reaston <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I had no problem with the windows bt stack at high data rates. Win xp with
>> the latest updates. Admittedly that was 6 months ago and I haven't touched
>> it since then.
>>
>> Phil Reaston
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On May 20, 2011, at 2:21, mike healy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Nick,
>>
>> Just to add to Steve's comments, the one point that springs to mind is how
>> do you know the problem is on the Shimmer side? If you are using Windows you
>> should note that the Windows BT stack is notoriously unreliable. The Widcomm
>> BT stack on Windows is better, but in my own experience if you want
>> reliability you can't beat bluez on Linux.
>>
>> And just as a sanity check I set 4 shimmers transmitting 127 bytes @100Hz
>> running this morning, and they ran fine for over an hour. This was
>> transmitting to a Linux machine. When I tried the same think in Windows
>> Hyperterminal froze and had to be forcibly quit very very quickly (but
>> admittedly I was running XP within a VMware image, so your mileage may
>> vary...).
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:59 AM, steve ayer < <[email protected]>
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> hi nick,
>>>
>>> the writeDone event indicates that all bytes fed to bluetooth.write have
>>> been delivered to the bluetooth module; it does not imply anything about the
>>> state of the module.
>>>
>>> two comments, if i may:
>>>
>>> 1) four nodes transmitting at 10 hz isn't exactly what i'd call a "heavy
>>> load."  the difference between results running at 1hz and 10 is probably
>>> just a demonstration of how long it takes for a bug to take its cumulative
>>> toll.  i won't get analytical on you, but at this pace you shouldn't even
>>> have to wait for the writeDone event to fire off a new packet...
>>>
>>> 2) this sounds like you have a bug in your app's state machine (please
>>> see above).
>>>
>>> have fun,
>>>
>>> steve
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05/20/2011 02:30 AM, Nicholas Hosein wrote:
>>>
>>>> So i am sending 102 bytes of data at 10 Hz from each of 4 motes to a
>>>> host over bluetooth.
>>>>
>>>> On the mote I only send a new packet once the previous one was sent via
>>>> checking for "event void Bluetooth.writeDone()" from the previous
>>>> packet. What ive noticed is that under stress the mote stops sending
>>>> packets altogether (but still receives fine). Even though no packets are
>>>> being sent from the mote the Bluetooth.writeDone event is still
>>>> triggered after a write command. Once the connection is reset the mote
>>>> can send packets again.
>>>>
>>>> This only seems to occur under stress. If i were to configure 1 mote to
>>>> send 102 bytes at 1Hz it would work fine for hours. Under any stress it
>>>> works for a matter of minuets or seconds.
>>>>
>>>> Does the writeDone event necessarily mean that the packet was sent or
>>>> that it is buffered to be sent?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks guys,
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Shimmer-users mailing list
>>>>  <[email protected]>[email protected]
>>>>  <https://lists.eecs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/shimmer-users>
>>>> https://lists.eecs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/shimmer-users
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Shimmer-users mailing list
>>>  <[email protected]>[email protected]
>>>  <https://lists.eecs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/shimmer-users>
>>> https://lists.eecs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/shimmer-users
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Shimmer-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.eecs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/shimmer-users
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Shimmer-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.eecs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/shimmer-users

Reply via email to